.
BY ANTIGONI PAPADOPOULOU, MEP
Štefan Füle, Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy has frequently made reference of the necessity to “lift the isolation of Turkish Cypriots”.
Considering the high level negotiations underway for Cyprus’ reunification, the notion of “Turkish Cypriot isolation” must be clarified. The essential point being that the onus is on Turkey, not Cyprus, to lift so-called Turkish Cypriot “isolation”. Only by ending her illegal military occupation and persisting secessionist actions can Turkish Cypriots fully enjoy all rights afforded by the European Union.
To redress the nature of the conflict, the 36-year division of Cyprus is not bi-communal in nature but the product of Turkish geostrategic policies and military expansionism. Prior to the Turkish invasion, Cypriots lived intermingled throughout the island. Referring to UN Mediator Galo Plaza’s March 1965 report, “The more general pattern in any given area is a mixture of Greek Cypriot, Turkish Cypriot and mixed villages.”
The fact remains that the Republic of Cyprus has taken great measures for Turkish Cypriots not only post-EU accession (and despite the suspension of the EU acquis communautaire in the occupied areas) but far earlier in the years ensuing the 1974 invasion.
For instance, following the invasion, the Republic of Cyprus provided the occupied area with free electricity, water and gas at a cost of over USD 343 mln from 1974-1996. This, despite the fact that the illegal occupation, which usurped 37% of the most fertile land of the Republic accounted for multi-billion Cyprus pound losses to the economy.
The underdevelopment of the economy in the occupied part is significantly attributed to the policies of the Turkish military occupation which actively discourage trade through the Green Line whilst advocating “direct” trade in efforts to promote recognition of the illegal regime, preferring instead to accuse the Republic of Cyprus of Turkish Cypriot "isolation".
To address the question of isolation post-EU accession, the Republic of Cyprus has in fact ensured the entitlement of Turkish Cypriots to passports, birth certificates and ID cards enabling them to enjoy benefits of EU membership. Turkish Cypriots can therefore move, work, study and settle freely within the Union and enjoy consular and diplomatic protection.
Thousands of Turkish Cypriots are also employed within the government controlled area and receive free medical care and social benefits at a cost of over EUR 6.9 mln and 32.3 mln, respectively since April 2003. Following the partial lifting of restrictions across the UN ceasefire line in April 2003, Turkish Cypriots have enjoyed substantial economic benefits (USD 57million from April 2003-2005) accrued from Greek Cypriot visits and tourist expenditure on goods and services.
Most importantly, on February 27, 2006 the Republic of Cyprus backed an EU aid program of EUR 259 mln for Turkish Cypriots, of which 99% has already been contracted with programs for integration and social and economic development. The government has also demined the buffer zone and made proposals to open eight additional crossing points.
The Republic of Cyprus has taken progressive measures to promote the 26th April 2004 European Council Conclusions which seek to integrate Turkish Cypriots and create a positive climate for a viable and long lasting solution. One which, contrary to previous plans, does not, among other things, include the provision for military intervention, which constituted an absurd mockery of an EU state.
The government is working hard for the reunification of the island. However, Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot leadership have not presented any workable proposals towards settlement. In January they submitted a package of ten proposals which clearly lead to a confederation based on two separate founding states. This is no basis for “reunification”. The proposals are way off what has been agreed as the basis for negotiations – that of working towards a bi-zonal bi-communal federation for one single state, with a single sovereignty, single citizenship and one international identity.
Considering these measures, adopted by the government for the integration of Turkish Cypriots, it is essential to debunk the notion of Turkish Cypriot “isolation” as one imposed by the government of Cyprus. This serves only to encourage Turkish intransigence in negotiations, and we all know it takes two to tango.
