US Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen: Time for Turkey to leave Cyprus in peace

(Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida Republican, is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee)

Long-standing occupation amounts to annexation

(The Washington Times) - Since its invasion of Cyprus in 1974, Turkey has claimed that it was acting as a protector and guarantor of the island’s security. But a closer examination of its actions on Cyprus indicates motivations of a very different character. Turkey’s invasion resulted in hundreds of thousands of Greek Cypriot refugees, who have been unable to return to their homes for almost 40 years. The international community has repeatedly condemned the illegal military occupation of Cyprus by Turkish troops. The United Nations Security Council has passed 75 resolutions calling for Turkey to allow Greek Cypriots to return to their homes and to withdraw its troops from Cyprus. Yet Turkey continues its occupation.

More than 40,000 heavily armed Turkish soldiers are occupying the northern part of the country, with one Turkish soldier for every two Turkish-Cypriots. The presence of this overwhelming force cannot be justified by the claims that they are needed to prevent any renewal of violence. In fact, since the 2003 opening of the border between the two communities, more than 17 million intercommunal visits have occurred without conflict.

The result of this occupation by foreign troops is that many Cypriot neighborhoods in the occupied areas remain vacant or in a state of disrepair. One of the most tragic examples is the Varosha region of Famagusta. Once an important commercial and tourism center for the island, Varosha was fenced off following the invasion, and access has been prohibited for all except Turkish military forces. Over the years, this area has become a virtual ghost town.

The desolation of Cypriot properties and cultural sites is not restricted to Varosha but is a reality in all the areas under Turkish military occupation. In fact, an estimated 520 Greek Orthodox churches and chapels, and 17 monasteries in the occupied areas have been pillaged, vandalized or destroyed. Often these religious sites have been converted into stables, bars, nightclubs, casinos or hotels, leaving more than 15,000 religious artifacts unaccounted for. This widespread destruction of Cypriot historic, religious and cultural identity certainly does not seem like the behavior of a “protective guardian.”

Read full article here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/15/time-for-turkey-to-leave-cyprus-in-peace/#ixzz2yilWkCJv 

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

The 'Cyprus Problem,' 35 Years In

(National Journal) - Q&A: ANDREAS KAKOURIS

The 'Cyprus Problem,' 35 Years In

On The Anniversary Of The 1974 Turkish Invasion, Cyprus' U.S. Ambassador Makes The Case For Reunification


When Turkish military forces invaded the island of Cyprus on July 20, 1974, Ankara argued that it was defending the status quo and heading off the forced annexation of the island by a military junta in Greece. Yet today, on the 35th anniversary of the invasion, Cyprus remains the only forcibly divided country in Europe, and one of the continent's most intractable problems. Recently, National Journal correspondent James Kitfield spoke with Andreas Kakouris, Cyprus' ambassador to the United States. Edited excerpts from their interview follow. Visit the archives page for more Insider Interviews.

NJ: After decades of United Nations resolutions and mediation on Cyprus, why is the island still divided?

Kakouris: We've been unable to move forward on a solution to the Cyprus problem because, quite frankly, Turkey hasn't accepted the solution of a bizonal, bicommunal federation that is the framework of countless United Nations resolutions. [Cypriot] President Demetris Christofias and Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat recently reiterated their support for that framework, with a single citizenship and political equality for everyone. Successive Turkish governments, however, have pushed instead for a solution based on a weak confederation of two distinct states.

NJ: What exactly is meant by a "bizonal" and "bicommunal" republic?

Kakouris: Within Cyprus you would have two areas, one of Greek Cypriot constituents, and the other of Turkish Cypriot constituents, but both parts of a federal republic. So there would be only one state and a single citizenship. By contrast, today 43,000 Turkish troops occupy 37 percent of the sovereign territory of a member of the European Union. In that occupied area there are 85,000 Turkish Cypriots and 160,000 Turkish settlers who have come since the invasion. There are 200,000 Cypriot refugees who remain displaced by the invasion. There are also problems of economic displacement, human rights violations, and the destruction of cultural artifacts.

NJ: Many observers put high hopes in the peace settlement proposed by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan in 2004. Why did the Greek Cypriot community overwhelmingly reject the Annan plan in a referendum?

Kakouris: In my estimation, the Annan plan had more to do with offloading the problem from the shoulders of Turkey than it did with solving the problem in a way that reunited the people and institutions of Cyprus. When you look closely at the elements of that plan, for instance, it included the continued presence of Turkish troops on Cyprus with a right to intervene in our affairs. Would anyone in the United States accept the idea of foreign troops on your soil, with the right of intervention? Cyprus is a member of the European Union. We don't need guarantor powers or the presence of foreign troops on our soil, with the exception perhaps of a continued United Nations force that might be included in a solution.

NJ: So the continued presence of foreign troops was the main sticking point in the Annan plan?

Kakouris: The plan also lacked functionality. In essence, it would have established parallel civil services. Nor were the rights of Greek Cypriot refugees to return to their homes guaranteed. They would have become second-class citizens in their own country under the Annan plan. The 160,000 settlers that Ankara has brought to Cyprus would also have remained on the island, by and large. The Annan plan would also have superseded as law Cyprus' rights as a member of the European Union. As an equal member in good standing of the European Union, that was something that we could not accept.

NJ: If the Annan plan was so flawed, how did it get all the way to a referendum?

Kakouris: When Annan invited the leaders of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots to... discuss his plan, many issues were glossed over. The tight timelines for arbitration meant that both sides never really engaged in serious negotiations, producing a disastrous plan that would essentially have endorsed two separate states on the island. So the Annan plan was someone else's interpretation of what was in our best interest as Cypriots. By contrast, the current negotiations between President Christofias and Talat are exploring solutions for Cypriots by Cypriots. That's far preferable to solutions designed to serve the best interest of other parties, including Turkey.

NJ: Yet don't you need Turkey to embrace any ultimate deal?

Kakouris: To be frank, yes, we do need Ankara to be more constructive and supportive. It's not enough for Ankara to say they support a solution to the "Cyprus problem." We need them to embrace the framework of a bizonal, bicommunal federation. After all, it should be remembered that Turkey is the aggressor and occupier here. Turkey is the only country that recognizes the so-called Turkish Republic of Cyprus, which was created by an act of secession that has been condemned by multiple U.N. resolutions. I recognize Turkey as a state, yet Turkey does not recognize the Republic of Cyprus.

Having said that, in a way it doesn't matter how good relations are between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders -- and those personal relations are quite good. The key to the solution remains in Ankara. We just hope Turkey will give Mr. Talat the room to negotiate in earnest without imposing its will from the outside.

NJ: Doesn't the fact that you are a member of the European Union since 2004, and thus hold a veto over Turkey's entry, give you significant leverage with Ankara?

Kakouris: You say Cyprus has a veto over Turkey's accession into the EU, but 26 other countries also have that veto. You might even assume that Cyprus opposes Turkey's membership in the EU, but in 2004 and 2005, when we could have exercised such a veto over Turkey's accession talks, we did not. We believe Turkey's European orientation is a positive for both Turkey and Cyprus. And we continue to hope that the EU can be a positive catalyst for a resolution to this problem.

NJ: So you firmly support Turkey's membership in the EU?

Kakouris: Cyprus supports Turkey's accession, but that is not a blank check. Turkey has obligations. In the past, Turkey has blocked Cyprus from joining international agreements. It continues to occupy the land of an EU member and refuses to recognize that state. Certainly under those circumstances, Turkey will not be able to join the EU.

NJ: What role would you like the United States to play in solving the "Cyprus problem?"

Kakouris: Well, if the United States wants to see Turkey anchored to the West through the European Union, Washington needs to realize that path runs through Cyprus. A solution to the Cyprus problem that reunifies the island and the social fabric of its people is also a "win-win" for Turkey. It finally gets rid of this Gordian knot in EU-Turkey relations.

I would also stress that Cyprus serves as Europe's lighthouse in the Eastern Mediterranean. We are a half-hour flight from Beirut, Damascus or Tel Aviv. When there was a crisis in 2006 because of the war in Lebanon, 60,000 foreign nationals evacuated to Cyprus, including 15,000 Americans. So there is a value added for both the European Union and the United States to Cyprus' position in that part of the world.

NJ: Yet hasn't Washington been reluctant to press the Cyprus issue in a way that complicates the United States' already difficult strategic relationship with Turkey?

Kakouris: No one has convinced me that Turkey's continued occupation of Cyprus either benefits Turkey or serves U.S. interests. Quite the opposite is true. At bottom, this issue is about principles and values that the United States holds sacrosanct: democracy, the rule of law, human rights. The Obama administration has already talked of the importance of finding a solution to this problem based on a bizonal and bicommunal federation, and I hope the United States will try and convince Turkey that is the right thing to do. There are many ways for the Obama administration to convey that message, and it doesn't have to be in public or through the press.

NJ: How are relations today between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots?

Kakouris: Since 2003, the restrictions on crossing the ceasefire line were partially lifted, meaning Greek and Turkish Cypriots could cross the line for the first time going back to 1974. Since then we have had 15 million incident-free crossings. That debunks the myth spread by some in Turkey that the 43,000 Turkish troops on Cyprus are needed because the two communities cannot live peacefully together.

NJ: Do you worry that the lack of tension puts the issue of Cyprus on the back burner in international forums?

Kakouris: Yes, because this problem is urgent. The passage of time doesn't improve the prospects for a solution. The older generation that lived together on a united island as part of intermingled communities, for instance, is getting older. The settlers that Turkey has brought to Cyprus put down deeper roots. In that respect, each day that passes solidifies the effects of the invasion and separation. So we want a solution to this problem yesterday, not today or tomorrow. And for those who see the relative peace of Cyprus and are tempted to accept the status quo, we say that peace is not the absence of war, but rather the presence of justice. And justice cannot exist in the midst of occupation.

NJ: Has the Cyprus problem defied solution, in part, because the Greek Cypriots are overwhelmingly Orthodox Christian and Turkish Cypriots are overwhelmingly Muslim?

Kakouris: Well, the Cyprus problem has never been fundamentally a religious issue. But if we find a solution that involves Cyprus' Christian Orthodox community and its Muslim community negotiating their common future together on a single homeland within Europe, it will certainly provide a poignant counterpoint to talk of a "clash of civilizations."

Stolen Harvest

A group of Turkish settlers accompanied by Turkish troops trespassed into a Greek Cypriot farm today and stole harvested wheat.

The violation of it all eats at you:

A Killer is a Candidate in the Upcoming "TRNC" Elections

Turkish settler, Kenan Akin, who killed Greek Cypriot Solomos Solomou during an anti occupation buffer zone protest back in 1996 said he would not hesitate to shoot him again. In an interview to a Greek daily, Akin said he would not travel abroad as he won't do anyone a favor and get arrested.

The Turkish settler currently has Interpol and Cyprus police warrants pending against him. He further claimed that the Republic of Cyprus does not have any credible evidence against him, suggesting that his bullet wasn't the one that killed Solomou.

Akin is a candidate in the upcoming illegal parliamentary elections which are to be held in the occupied areas. His running for "parliamentary elections" was mentioned in the Kibris Gazetesi, a Turkish Cypriot newspaper.

An English translation of the relevant excerpts from the Kibris Gazetsi:

KENAN AKIN now ORP candidate: Kenan Akin once a Democratic Party (DP) Minister of Agriculture, is once more in the political arena now. But this time running for parliamentary elections not from DP (Democratic Party) list, but competing at the 5th row from the Freedom and Reform Party (ORP) Magusa (Famagusta) list. According to sources of information, ORP President Turgay Avci is in the 1st row , followed by Deputy Erden Ozaskin in the 2nd row, and ORP Secretary-General Baghdad Sinan in the 3rd place. 4th row in the list is vacant yet while Kenan Akin is at the 5th row. Undersecretary of the Ministry of Economy and Tourism Hasan Kiliç's is also reported to be candidate for ORP's Magusa list, while there are talks about Nazmiye Çelebi, a teacher, also running for candidacy from Magusa list. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Coordinator Alper Zorlu's is also rumored to be ORP candidate from Iskele district.

Census takes place in the occupied North

Turkish Cypriot authorities have this week carried out a census of the population in the occupied North. The government of RoC has refused in advance to recognize the results of the census ... describing it as unreliable as it aims to legitimize the illegal settlers from Turkey. Preliminary results of the census, according to (the “Prime Minister of TRNC”) Mr. Ferdi Sabit Soyer, indicate a 31% increase of the population in the breakaway Northern statelet, compared to the results of the last census carried out ten years ago. Here is an article from the Cyprus Weekly that delves into the recent census and the issue of Turkish settlers in greater detail:

Legitimising the war crime of ethnic cleansing

Ethnic cleansing and the consequent deliberate changing of the demographic status of a territory under foreign occupation through the introduction of settlers from the occupying power are both war crimes.

This is an undisputed fact of international law. In the case of Cyprus it is also undisputed that Turkey, as the power occupying north Cyprus, and as such responsible for everything that happens there, is guilty of these twin war crimes: the ethnic cleansing of the Greek Cypriot population of the north and its recplacement by settlers from Turkey.

In a move clearly designed to ``legitimise’’ the presence of the illegal settlers, Turkey and the illegal breakaway state staged a census there this week in which the settlers were counted as members of the Turkish Cypriot population of the region.

As expected, Mehmet Ali Talat defended this trickery saying it was wrong to claim this was designed to legitimise the settlers. The leader of the illegal state went as far as to declare that the census was perfectly legal, conducted on the basis of ``internationally recognised norms". ``There was nothing to hide’’ and ``no need to prove anything to anyone,’’ on the issue of the settlers, who are legitimate citizens of the breakaway state he said.

He further assured the settlers that they had nothing to fear as they were equal citizens to the Turkish Cypriots and that there was no attempt to distinguish them in any way.

Myths

Ferdi Sabit Soyer, the ``prime minister’’ of the breakaway state was even more forthright. He said the census would end what he referred to as ``the myths’’ about the north’s demography. ``We have no need to trick anyone,’’ he said.

What is even more astounding about this situation is that Talat, when he was in opposition, made the presence of the settlers one of the main points of criticism of Rauf Denktash, the then leader of the Turkish Cypriots. Talat attended public rallies then that demanded the withdrawal of the settlers, arguing that they were outnumbering the native Turkish Cypriots with whom they were unable to assimilate!

Following his election and his full dependence on Ankara for survival, Talat has now changed his tune completely, maintaining there is nothing wrong with the presence of the settlers.

But this wrong, or guilt, is fully attested by the numerous United Nations General Assembly and Security Council resolutions and judgements of the Human Rights Court of the Council of Europe. The resolutions and the judgements demand an end to this continuous war crime through the withdrawal of the illegal Turkish mainland settlers and the return of the ethnically cleansed Greek Cypriot refugees to their homes and properties that have been usurped by the settlers.

Eternal shame

Turkey contemptuously rejects both the UN resolutions and the Court judgements. What is most regrettable about this situation is that the international community, and more specifically the United States and the European Union, which are in a position to influence, even pressure, Turkey, to end this continuous war crime against Cyprus and the Greek Cypriot population by complying with the UN resolutions and the Court judgements, choose to do nothing, to their eternal shame.

Not only that, the EU is even considering Turkey as a prospective member of the Union without insisting that it should, at the very least, first become law-abiding by complying with the Court judgements and the UN resolutions. The United States at the same time are exerting as much pressure as they can on the EU to accept Turkey as a full member!

It is hardly surprising that Turkey has become so emboldened by this toleration of its continuing war crimes in Cyprus that it brazenly declares it has done nothing wrong.

No squeak

What is hard to understand about this situation is the lack of a dynamic reaction by the Cyprus government. One would have expected a major continuing campaign to inform the world, and to demand concrete action by the international community, about the continuing Turkish war crimes.

Such a campaign would be even more effective if the ethnic cleansing crime was linked to the equally hideous deliberate action by Turkey to wipe out the Hellenistic and Christian cultural heritage of the occupied north. Like the influx of the settlers, this is also continuing unabated through the deliberate desecration and desruction of Christian churces and ancient Greek sites in an attempt to create the impression that north Cyprus has no Greek or Christian links!

This truly abominable, deliberate uncivilised action by Turkey should prove more than enough for the European Union, which is so anxious about the protection of its cultural heritage, to tell Turkey bluntly it has no hope whatever of joining it, unless it acts in a civilised manner in Cyprus by correcting as soon as possible all the wrongs for which it is fully responsible.

"International Crisis Group"

From The Cyprus Weekly:

Crisis Group report denounced as shockingly pro-Turkish


Turkey and TCs praised for Annan Plan acceptance


A REPORT by the "International Crisis Group" (ICG) on the Cyprus situation in Cyprus was denounced as completely biased, pro-Turkish and as such inconsequential and unacceptable by Government Spokesman George Lillikas and other Greek Cypriot personalities yesterday.

The report entitled `The Cyprus Stalemate: What Next?' which was presented in Nicosia on Wednesday, cites President Tassos Papadopoulos as the main obstacle to a Cyprus settlement.

Its main theme is that the controversial Annan Plan, which was overwhelmingly rejected by the Greek Cypriots in the 2004 referendum, "represents the only feasible basis for a reunification solution," and praises Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots for accepting it in a their separate referendum.

The 30-page report analyses the situation in a way that absolves Turkey completely of any blame for its continuing occupation of north Cyprus (something it studiously avoids mentioning) and its consequences.

No reference to UN resolutions


It also avoids any reference to the ethnic cleansing of the Greek Cypriot population of the north, the gross violations of the human rights of the displaced Greek Cypriot refugees, and to the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights.

These found Turkey guilty, repeatedly ordering it to allow the refugees to return and to regain their usurped properties This is something restricted by the Annan Plan which is so strongly backed by the IGC report.

IGC also avoids any reference to the numerous UN resolutions that demand the reunification of the island, the unconditional return of the refugees, the withdrawal of the Turkish occupation troops and the tens of thousands of mainland settlers introduced to the occupied north in violation of the Geneva Conventions. These resolutions brand the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state illegal and a vassal state of Turkey and urge the international community to have nothing to do with it. Despite this the IGC report's other main thrust is for and ending to the ``isolation'' of the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state as a reward for its acceptance of the Annan Plan.

It is as if this acceptance by itself automatically nullifies the judgements of the Rights Court and the UN resolutions, legitimising the breakaway state and all the other illegal consequences of the Turkish invasion and occupation. Indeed the report argues that ``the 2004 vote in the north for reunification has invalidated the political logic of isolation.''

In connection with the settlers the report says their influx continues and warns that this increases the risk of the Turkish Cypriots "becoming a minority in their own part of the island," taking it for granted that the north belongs to them and not to the people of Cyprus as a whole!

While pushing hard on the "isolation" issue the report avoids reference to the substantial financial gain of the economy of the north resulting from the income of the thousands of Turkish Cypriots crossing to work in the south, of the government pension payments to the north and free medical aid.

It also avoids explaining that the "isolation," where it exists, is brought on as much by the breakaway state itself which insists on being treated as an equal with the Cyprus government. This insistence prompted it to reject EU aid of 120m euros, insisting this should be paid to it direct and not through the Cyprus government!

Criticism of Papadopoulos


In its determination to blame President Papadopoulos, the report ignores his repeated statements that a Cyprus settlement must be firmly based on the relevant UN resolutions, respect for Human Rights, the judgements of the Rights Court, and, following the accession of Cyprus to the European Union, compliance with the EU aquis, or basic EU principles.

These fundamental demands are also ignored by the Annan Plan and this was one of the main reasons for its overwhelming rejection by the Greek Cypriots in the 2004 referendum.

It is for these reasons, among others, that the plan was accepted in the separate Turkish Cypriot referendum whose outcome was determined by the participation of the illegal Turkish mainland settlers who had every reason to vote `Yes,' since the plan legitimises their stay in the island.

The report states bluntly that "the most substantial blockage of such an agreement (based on the Annan Plan) is now the policy and attitude of the Greek Cypriot leadership and in particular of President Tassos Papadopoulos."

It charges that President Papadopoulos "does not seem to have any inclination, or coherent strategy on how, to get reunification back on track, and the prospects of achieving it look bleak."

The report rejects the conclusions of the Annan-Papadopoulos Paris meeting last month as inconsequential. It declares that this ended with "no indication of serious re-engagement by the Greek Cypriot side."

This contrasts glaringly with the view of the US Ambassador to Cyprus Ronald Schlicher who, during a visit to Limassol this week, described the outcome of the Paris meeting as a major breakthrough in the settlement efforts.

In its staunch support of the Annan Plan, the report quotes people backing it but avoids any parallel reference to the many prominent international critics, including eminent jurists, who maintain it is so flawed, and pro-Turkish, as to be unacceptable.

'We gave Cyprus to Turkey in form of the Annan Plan'


In this respect, it is worth recalling the blunt public admission by a senior United States State Department official, who summed up the situation by declaring in public that "we gave Cyprus to Turkey in the form of the Annan Plan."

Report excerpts and comments

THE report is too long to reproduce in full. Here are some of its key points, glaring inconsistencies and recommendations (with page reference):

1 - The report refers to Turkey's right to intervene militarily under the Treaty of Guarantee following the 1974 coup by the Greek junta. But it avoids clarifying that this right was strictly aimed at restoring the constitutional order, not to occupy the north, expel the Greek Cypriot population and eventually proclaim a breakaway state.

4 - Reference to ``143,000 Turkish Cypriots going to the polls'' in the 1974 referendum, without specifying that this figure included the illegal mainland settlers who had every reason to vote `Yes," and who outnumbered the native voters as claimed by Turkish Cypriots themselves.

7 - Saying that that "Claims that the Annan Plan violated EU law and the European Convention of Human Rights are overstated." This in effect admits that rights are violated, but sidelines the natural expectation that any violations must cease, and not be condoned.

7 - "Complaints about the Annan Plan's toleration of the continued presence of Turkish troops are overstated ... Complete demilitarisation of the island was unattainable in the context of the 1960 constitutional treaties, which were not in question in the 2004 referendum.'' It is strange that the report justifies the presence of the Turkish troops under the 1960 treaties, but ignored all the other provisions of the same treaties which are also ignored by the Annan Plan.

7 - The report argues that the Greek Cypriots should have voted yes in the referendum ``so that many refugees could return home, rather than `no' so that none could return.'' The `No' vote was precisely because the Annan Plan did not allow all the refugees to return, as demanded by UN resolutions and international law.

13 - In a remarkable piece of advice to the Greek Cypriots, the report says that "if they are worried about the Turkish Cypriots seeking recognition, they should call their presumed bluff and accept the Annan Plan."

20 - In an even more remarkable passage, the report makes a brief comment that unwittingly reveals the main obstacle to a settlement all these years. The comment says that following its accession to the EU Cyprus is using this to increase pressure on Turkey. But it then adds that "it is most improbable that any Turkey government now or in the future could afford to give up Cyprus for the sake of EU membership." This is clearly an admission that Turkey intends to maintain its hold on Cyprus no matter what.

Threat of secession is repeated


Taking this further, the report in effect warns that if the EU rejects Turkey's full membership, then "Turkey's incentives to seek accommodation with anyone in the EU, let alone the Cyprus government, would greatly diminish, and the likelihood of a push for TRNC secession would accordingly increase.''

21 - The threat of secession is also repeated in a reference to the likelihood of the rejection of an agreed solution in a second referendum. In such a case "the two communities could then be granted the option of separate self-determination by the international community."

28 - The report argues that following the accession of Cyprus to the EU, "the EU has become part and parcel of the conflict and cannot credibly undertake a mediating role: this will remain the responsibility of the UN." But the EU should assist in ``the economic development and European integration of northern Cyprus and contribute constructively to the much-abused `European solution' slogan on the island.'' It should also increase bilateral contacts with Turkish Cypriot politicians and maintain ``constant pressure on the Greek Cypriot government to moderate its intransigence.''

29 - The EU, the US and other states should open branch offices in the north.

Expanding on this, the report says one option that could be considered, "if international impatience with the Greek Cypriots became very strong," would be for the UN to decide that a Cyprus delegation would only be seated if it included representations from both communities.

Other intergovernmental institutions such as the Council of Europe "could follow suit." If Cyprus refused, the report says, this would "open the way for the separate international political representation of the Turkish Cypriots, with all that would imply."

More...

International Crisis Group

Report extremely biased

THE government and Greek Cypriots in general were rightly angered this week by the extremely biased, pro-Turkish report of the International Crisis Group entitled "Reflections on the Cyprus Stalemate: What Next?"

The government tried to play down the importance of the report, arguing that the IGC is a little-known group and that its biased report is of no consequence.

The wide distribution of the report, however, is clearly a major public relations coup for Turkey and the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state who are presented as the angels in the Cyprus imbroglio, while President Tassos Papadopoulos is demonised as the main obstacle to a settlement.

The nature of the report was summed up perfectly by Andreas Theophanous, the Director of the Research and development Centre of Intercollege. He described it as an attempt at historical revisionism similar to the attempt by certain people who argue the Nazi holocaust never happened, since the authors of the ICG report also claim Turkey committed no war crimes or human rights violations in Cyprus.

Anyone even faintly informed about the Cyprus problem realises, of course, how unfair and deliberately misleading the report by the allegedly independent ICG is and how baseless is its demonisation of President Papadopoulos.

The vast majority of people everywhere who are unaware of the intricacies of the Cyprus problem, or of the unpunished continuing war crimes and gross human rights violations committed by Turkey as a result of its continuing occupation of north Cyprus, will undoubtedly form an erroneous view of the Cyprus problem if they come across this report. This is all the more worrying since the ICG Board of Governors is a perfectly respectable, widely representative collection of 56 prominent international personalities, including former Prime Ministers and other senior politicians, diplomats and other VIPs from many countries.

One may well wonder whether any of these 56 governors are aware of the report or even if they have read, and agree with its twisted conclusions.

This is immaterial however; the sad reality is that this report has been published and may damage the just cause of Cyprus.

One would have expected that the Cyprus government would have wasted no time in arranging a press conference, or at least in issuing a statement, to demolish the gross inaccuracies and castigate the equally gross omissions and deliberate misrepresentations of the ICG report, allowing its presenters to remain officially unchallenged.

Viewpoint, Cyprus Weekly, March 2006

Complacent attitude to Blair’s Oram's defence

Blair has not visited occupied northern Cyprus in connection with her defence of a British couple who have been ordered to tear down a built on house on property belonging to a Greek Cypriot refugee, British Minister for Europe Douglas Alexander has confirmed.

In his written response to Theresa Villiers MP, Alexander said nor was Blair the guest of the British Consul-General when recently visiting Istanbul in her professional capacity.

The Government warns British citizens, through its online travel advice and in response to enquiries, of the risks purchasers face when buying in northern Cyprus, said Alexander.

Cherie Blair’s decision to defend the Orams has already caused a diplomatic outcry from the Cyprus Press and Government. In April last year EU newcomer Cyprus warned it would use courts in other EU countries to enforce decisions against property investors who had bought property in northern Cyprus that Greek owners had been forced to abandon when Turkey invaded the island. This followed a European Court of Human Rights decision upholding the property rights of one such Greek owner against the Turkish Cypriot occupiers of her property.

It put the number of Greek Cypriots affected at over 200,000 and estimated that between them they hold valid titles to approximately 82 per cent of the privately owned land in the occupied areas. UK property investors have been prominent buyers of properties in northern Cyprus where prices have tended to be cheaper than in the south.

Villiers said that although it was a relief to hear Blair had not visited Turkish occupied Cyprus in relation to the case, she was still dismayed at the complacency of Alexander’s letter. The Government was trying to bring the two sides together in Cyprus, but the Foreign Office did not seem even to be worried about the controversy caused by Blair's involvement in case.

'In defending the Orams, she is flatly contradicting the advice of the Foreign Office by actively supporting those who have gone against this advice and “bought” land owned by refugees’, she said, vowing to campaign for the Government to strengthen its advice to those thinking of purchasing property in occupied northern Cyprus.

Legal Fees

Mrs. Blair is back in the news. New details of Mrs. Blair’s involvement in the Oram’s case have been uncovered, please read below for more details.

We are paying Mrs. Blair gbp 200,000.
Getting her on the Turkish side...
(The Mail on Sunday Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)
Cherie Blair was last night at the centre of a fresh row over her business affairs after a Mail on Sunday investigation uncovered new details about her latest high profile legal case.

More from Jean Christou on this developing story below:

REPORTS in a British newspaper that the Turkish government is paying part of Cherie Blair’s £200,000 Sterling fee to defend the Orams shows that the case has political significance despite protest to the contrary by Downing Street, the government said yesterday. 

Britain’s Mail on Sunday went undercover to investigate the case of Linda and David Orams, who are attempting to justify their possession of land in the north belonging to Greek Cypriot Meletis Apostolides. 

The British Prime Minster Tony Blair’s barrister wife is taking part in the defence of the couple, who are appealing a Nicosia court decision ordering them to demolish the £160,000 villa they built on Apostolides’ property in Lapithos. 

As the Nicosia court cannot enforce its decisions in the north, the case has been accepted by the UK courts. 

Cherie Blair’s law firm Matrix, was brought in by the Orams’ Turkish Cypriot lawyer Hassan Vahib, 44, a property developer and former Labour councillor in London, who is also one of the parties paying the couple’s legal costs. 

Downing Street has insisted that Blair is acting in her professional capacity as a lawyer but a reporter from the Mail on Sunday discovered otherwise while posing as someone interested in buying property in the north. 

The paper said it spoke to the operations manager of Vahib’s property firm Troy Lake UK (Cyprus) Ltd, Firtac Ortac, who confirmed the firm was contributing to Cherie Blair's costs and that the reason for hiring her was because of her political influence. 

“At a meeting with an undercover Mail on Sunday reporter he said: 'We are paying her more than £200,000. The clients are not paying. We are. We can afford it and we have much ourselves to gain. When Mrs Blair wins, it will set a precedent and the market will rocket.' 

“Ortac also said that the hiring of the Prime Minister's wife was, for them, a political act, the paper said: “We have about 25 lawyers working for us, so there is no shortage of legal brains. But you see the North-South dispute is also very political. 

“They (the Greek Cypriots) have made it political, so now we get political too. What can be better than getting the wife of the British Prime Minister on our team? She is a noted human rights lawyer too, so simply getting her involved and on the Turkish side is fantastic,” he added.
Ortac claimed that the Turkish government was also paying Blair because they were 'playing a political game' and boasted that Vahib was in regular contact with Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, the paper said. 

Blair agreed to take the case following hush-hush meetings with Vahib and the Orams in Istanbul last May. “Cherie Blair spent three days in the city, during which she was a guest of the British consulate. However, she demanded that the reason for her trip be kept confidential,” it added. 

Another property developer, several of whom are involved in financing the case, said they were hoping she could use her political influence in the case. “What can be better than getting the wife of the British Prime Minister on our team?” said one. “When Mrs Blair wins, it will set a precedent and the market will rocket.” 

Government spokesman Kypros Chrysostomides said it was obvious from the report that those who hired Blair hired her specifically in order to exploit her politically as the wife of the British Prime Minister. 

“What is particularly important is that someone appears to admit that the Turkish Government will pay all of part of the fees of Mrs Blair,” he said. 

“Perhaps they believe by hiring her they might be able to influence the course of British justice. Is the impression not created that by accepting such a politically loaded case, Mrs Blair has given insufficient weight to her position as the wife of the British Prime Minister?” 

Chrysostomides said it should also be borne in mind that the British Foreign Ministry has on many occasions published warnings to Britons about the legal minefield of purchasing property in the north. “It seems Mrs Blair has not taken these warnings into consideration,” he said. 

The Orams told the Mail on Sunday that they had agreed with their legal team not to speak until after the conclusion of the case. 

“All I can say to you now is that we are extremely confident of winning,” Linda Orams said. 

My personal opinion: How can Mrs B-liar, sorry I mean Mrs Booth, not now withdraw from this case?