How do you see the developments in Ukraine?
The developments are very unpleasant, they are tragic, and they have to do with the whole world, they seriously affect Europe and Cyprus. AKEL's position on the events is clear. The invasion is illegal, unacceptable and condemnable. It should be ended, Russian troops should withdraw and solutions should be sought through politics and diplomacy. That is the main thing today. The next day of the war will be very difficult and will pose unavoidable dilemmas not only for Russia and Ukraine, not only for Europe, but for the whole world. And the first issue that will be raised is the architectural security of the whole world. What is certain is that in Cold War terms and with the institutions and organisations of this era, peace and security cannot be guaranteed. The problems are not of today. The invasion of Ukraine is not the first in Europe since the end of the Second World War. There is Turkey's invasion of Cyprus, there is the break-up of Yugoslavia, there are many other invasions outside Europe. I say this, not to justify the Russian invasion - any other - but to underline that there must be a reflection and a debate on the security architecture of the world, which must of course be based on international law and respect for the will of peoples. This debate should be conducted with a lot of calm and patience.
Specifically for Cyprus, what risks do you see, both at the economic level and at the political level?
At the economic level, there are issues that are easy to foresee, but there may be issues that may arise that may not be easy to identify now. The breadth and depth of the impact will depend on the duration of the war in Ukraine, as well as the content and duration of any sanctions. There are impacts on energy issues - fuel and electricity - there are the issues relating to grain and the food chain, there are the revaluations of basic goods and services. There are certainly the effects on tourism, and I am not just talking about the number of tourists coming from Russia and Ukraine, but also the general negative climate that will affect the tourism industry internationally. If the war continues then the effects will be cascading as we will enter a domino effect at all levels. Another pillar is financial, services, there will be intensified precision and inflation, families and businesses will be affected, there will be liquidity and uncertainty. All this needs to be seen globally and carefully in order to prepare. We as AKEL have made an assessment in principle of all these issues and formulated proposals to address, as far as possible, the problems while waiting for the President to convene the Council of Heads to discuss the issue.
Has there been a response?
I must say that the President has responded positively and said that on his return from abroad he will convene a Council of Heads. Until then, it would be good for the government to continue its studies and for us to continue ours so that collectively we can see how the situation is being addressed. I would like to point out that this whole situation is adding to the wave of insecurity that started several months ago because of the pandemic. Since last October, we have been calling for measures to deal with this situation and have put forward specific proposals. I am sorry to say that at that stage the government either underestimated the risks or did not take our warnings into account at all. Now things have become much more complex and much more pressing.
Apart from the economy, at the political level, what risks do you see for Cyprus? We see Turkey taking on the role of mediator.
The first major risk is that the Cyprus problem could well be pushed to the margins of the international agenda. After all, since 2017 there has been a prolonged stalemate that has left its negative imprint on the prospect of a solution. It becomes doubly urgent to take concrete initiatives on our part to break the deadlock. To this end, we have submitted a specific proposal to the President of the Republic since last December. The other key issue is how Turkey will use the situation to promote its role and image. As we can see, Ankara is pursuing a role not only as a tactfully neutral but also as an honest broker. We see Turkey taking initiatives that are accepted by the international community. Turkey is credited by the international community with good intentions while not complying with EU decisions and at the same time the Republic of Cyprus is being pressured to comply with sanctions against Russia. These selective sensitivities of the international community, as well as the EU, are being exploited to the fullest by Turkey.
In general, on the Cyprus problem, do you think it is possible to create the conditions for a resumption of the effort before the 2023 elections?
In this environment it is difficult. And the difficulties are made even greater by the fact that there are elections in both Cyprus and Turkey. The additional difficulty is that the international actor, the UN Secretary General himself, does not trust the two sides to take the initiative. It is no coincidence that the Secretary-General has gained this impression. As far as our side is concerned, we believe that the President of the Republic, through his policies, his approaches and his tactics, has not been able to convince us that he means what he says. You cannot say that you are ready to resume the dialogue from the point where it was interrupted and at the same time open up issues that have been agreed and the Secretary-General wants them to be preserved. You cannot bring in new ideas that clash with convergences, as the President is doing. It is in this way that N. Anastasiades has exhausted what little credibility he had left after Crans Montana.
Such as?
You cannot raise the issue of changing the constitution when it has long been agreed upon. You can't open issues of political equality that have also been agreed upon. These contradictions of the President, these misguided policies and approaches have undermined his credibility. His negotiator, Andreas Mavroyiannis, says that as a Greek Cypriot community we have no credibility and we cannot be believed. Moreover, seeing the accusations between the two sides, the Secretary General was discouraged. All this should give us cause for concern because the passage of time without a solution consolidates the division that we want to prevent.
Could the MEAs be a tool for the two sides to come closer?
In my view, the specific MEAs are not. They have been tried in the past and I must say that not only was there a deadlock but Glafkos Clerides himself, who had proposed something similar, terminated the discussion when he feared that at some point data would be created on the negotiating table that would adversely affect essential aspects of the substance of the Cyprus problem. He feared that the MoU would be a substitute for a solution.
Facts on sovereignty issues?
And on sovereignty issues as well as on issues related to the continuity of the state. All that we found before us in the debate that took place in 1993-1994, which troubled Glafkos Clerides at the time. We had told the President that of course we need a positive agenda to see how we create momentum to resume negotiations, but resorting to these MOUs will cause additional complications and will not help create momentum to resume negotiations. We have countered the President with what the UN Secretary-General is saying. Use Natural Gas to act as a catalyst to restart negotiations. We put specific content to this position of the Secretary General, we gave him the proposal from the previous December but unfortunately the President not only did not agree to discuss it but rejected it. One of the arguments put forward by the President is that if 'if we give something of the gas now what will be the incentive for the Turkish Cypriots to move towards a solution'. Our proposal stipulates that whatever happens on the gas will happen after the solution. In contrast, in the case of the President's proposal for the operation of the Tympos airport, what the President suggests will happen. The Turkish Cypriot community will get what it wants and will have no serious incentive to move towards a solution.
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs Cyprus Times
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or Cyprus Times
Source
