Is there progress in the Cyprus talks? (I)

The meeting was a routine, annual event of the Famagusta branches of the two socialist parties. What was not routine? Firstly, Christofias was no longer just the secretary-general of AKEL, but he was also the Greek Cypriot leader. Secondly, for the first time in the political history of the island, a Greek Cypriot leader complained about the behavior or negotiating position of a Turkish Cypriot leader not only to the Turkish Cypriot people but also to the representatives of a political party who was the former party of the Turkish Cypriot leader in office.

Christofias started his speech stressing that he was attending the meeting, "to tell you the realities," that is not to wine and dine only, and head on accused Mehmet Ali Talat, his Turkish Cypriot counterpart and negotiating partner for the past three months in what has been described as the "comprehensive talks," of behaving in a manner very much like Rauf Denktaş, the hard liner former Turkish Cypriot leader, and of trying to promote confederation or a two-state settlement rather than talking about creation of a unitary federal state.

He stressed that the past three months of Cyprus talks did not meet his expectations and though the negotiation process was still at a beginning stage and it was too early to reach a definitive conclusion, he was unhappy with the way the talks were progressing.

Why is Christofias unhappy?
Perhaps Christofias was assuming that Talat would continue abiding with the "Cyprus belongs to Cypriots" slogan the AKEL and CTP shared when both were in the opposition, and the understanding of the two socialist parties, again during those years, that a settlement must be reached by "kicking out from the island the Turkish military" and by rehashing the concept of "Cyprus nation" - which would render Turkish Cypriots nothing further than the Maronite, Armenian or Latin minorities in the predominantly Greek Cypriot "nation" on the island.

However, since his election as president, proving the saying that "crown provides wisdom," Talat has changed a lot and has been stressing that a settlement must conform to the "political equality" of the two founding states of the "two peoples" of the island. Should Talat retreat from his "there are two separate peoples on Cyprus" position, Christofias still has hopes to convince the Turkish Cypriot leader to give up his demand for "equality of the two founding states" and accept instead equal representation of the "two communities" in the administration of the island, in proportion to their sizes or along the famous three Turks to seven Greeks scale of the 1960 founding agreements and constitution.

But, when Talat refuses to acknowledge the existence of a Cypriot nation with two communities and insists on talking about two peoples and their democracies must be the equal co-founders of the new state, Christofias gets frustrated. This is indeed the crux of the Cyprus problem and unless somehow the two leaders agree to develop a common language and a common perception with regard to what are Turkish and Greek Cypriots and how will be their new partnership the progress they might achieve under all other headings of the "comprehensive" talks would not have any value further than that of the paper they will be written on.

A second unhappiness of Christofias is Talat’s refusal to accept a "security scheme" other than the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee and of Alliance under which Turkey, Greece and Britain have guarantor powers on the island. Changing the guarantee scheme or diluting it with the inclusion of the European Union or NATO has been unacceptable for Turkish Cypriots because of the recent history of the island. If Greek Cypriots have no intention of butchering up Turkish Cypriots once again as they attempted times from 1963 to 1974, it is difficult for Turkish Cypriots to understand why they are opposing Turkey’s guarantee? This is the second major deadlock in the talks, but there are many...