& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

The Cyprus question remains unresolved

MUHAMMAD ZAMIR
WE stand here in the north of Cyprus, at a crossroads of great historical eras and an intersection of far-ranging geographies. For thousands of years our island has been home to the civilisations of East and West. And now the Turkish Cypriots, the Greek Cypriots, and the minority groups who share this common history and heritage, have arrived at a turning point. A point, where we must create a new Cyprus within the European Union for our common future and the future of our children' (Mehmet Ali Talat, Leader of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, 24 April, 2005).
The Cyprus question is again dominating news. The need for a comprehensive settlement of this unresolved issue has again come to the forefront of international attention.
Sir Kieran Prendergast, UN Under-Secretary General for Political Affairs has just submitted his latest report and briefing on 22 June, 2005. This has been placed in front of the UN Security Council. It was prepared after his latest visit to Cyprus, Greece and Turkey between 30 May and 7 June, 2005. This step was taken in pursuance of the UN Secretary General's Mission of Good offices in Cyprus. Apparently, the trip was undertaken to 'take the pulse' and to find out where the parties stand, to seek their views on what, if anything, the United Nations should be doing in current circumstances. It is this which made the UN initiative important.
It is clear from the findings that the Turkish Cypriot and the Greek Cypriot side continue to differ on elements like territory, property, resettlement of dislocated Turkish Cypriots, financing and guarantees against usurpation of the settlement arrangements by either side. A significant reason for this appears to be because of the lack of confidence that exists between the two parties.
These differences in perspective have also been compounded by the fact that Greece continues to believe that certain aspects of the UN comprehensive plan on Cyprus reflected the fears of the past more than it did the challenges of the future with Cyprus as a member of the European Union. Nevertheless,
the UN Envoy was informed that 'the Greek Government would want to see the two sides in cooperative negotiations based on the UN plan so that outstanding concerns could be addressed and a settlement achieved.'
The Turkish Government has also indicated that 'they wished to see a settlement based on the UN plan.' More importantly, they have expressed flexibility by suggesting that they are open to the Greek Cypriot side furnishing 'a clear and exhaustive list of changes it would like to see to the plan'. These views have been reiterated by Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan during his lunch with the UN Secretary General in New York on 9 June.
The Turkish Cypriot side wants to see a settlement as soon as possible based on the UN plan. They also wish for intensive negotiations under the auspices of the UN Secretary General for this purpose. On procedure, the Turkish Cypriot side favours a process with UN arbitration and clear time limits for negotiations. This is to avoid the prospect of negotiations dragging on indefinitely. The Turkish Cypriots, quite understandably, are sensitive about the fact that there was insufficient acknowledgement by the international community to the positive gestures made by them in the referendum. In this regard, they highlight that the Turkish side had accepted the compromise UN plan and yet the UN Security Council refrained from taking the necessary steps to end the unjustified isolation that continues to punish the Turkish Cypriots.
In several statements in the recent past, Turkish Cypriot leadership have demonstrated their posi-
tive approach. Mr Talat has gone on record and said that his people were prepared to accept the UN plan not because it was ideal, but as a compromise.
From what has been stated above, it is clear that some important positives have surfaced. All parties wish to see some sort of resumption of active UN good offices. There are still wide gaps in the stated positions, but all parties, also accept, that the UN plan should serve as the document on which negotiations could resume. This view is strengthened by the fact that political figures on both sides are initiating contacts with each other. This is bound to result in greater mutual understanding.
There have also been reports of useful contacts at other levels -among ordinary people, now that they are able to cross to the other side. It is also encouraging to know (from representatives of certain civil societies) that grassroots opinion on both sides is being obtained through independent bi-communal survey. Polled attitudes are also being identified, with regard to possible and potential changes to the UN plan, to facilitate the securing of majority support for the UN plan in both communities. Direct phone calls have again become operational between the northern and the southern parts of Cyprus since August 2004. All churches in the north are also being permitted to conduct liturgies. New crossing points are also being opened on the border between the two parts. These are constructive steps.
In the coming months, the UN Secretary General will have to give attention to many contentious issues. Cyprus will have to be one of
them. It is true that it will be difficult. It will also be natural for each party to seek to protect its own interests on both procedure and substance. It will however be equally important to encourage both sides to focus on their over-riding common interest, namely, the need to agree on revisions. This will enable the UN plan to command majority support within each community.
Responsibilities in this regard will also devolve directly on the Governments of Greece and Turkey. Probably, more so for Greece (as a member of the EU, which stresses so much on human rights and equal opportunities) than Turkey. Greece, in particular, will need to think afresh on certain aspects of the problems, so that a solution can be achieved on the basis of a revised UN plan.
Cyprus entered the European Union on 1 May, 2004, but, despite its entry, it continues to remain divided and militarized. Such a situation is affecting its population living on both sides of the divide.
I also strongly believe that time has come to arrive at a fair, viable and carefully balanced compromise requirements of all concerned. It is for this reason that I have started today's article with a quotation from the Turkish Cypriot leader Talat. He has correctly pointed towards the future and the need to overcome existing differences.
Such a view is consistent with reality. Over the years, the people of North Cyprus, majority of whom are Muslims, have paid a very dear price for trying to protect their interests and rights. Today, they are seeking a balanced compromise. Like their compatriots in the South,
they have equal rights to share economic prosperity and development on the basis of a federal structure based on political equality.
The European Union has a moral responsibility. It has admitted within itself only a section of the Cypriot population and indirectly perpetuated isolation. Despite its preference for accession of a reunited Cyprus and its support to the good offices mission of the UN Secretary General, what we have today is absence of integration and compromise. The EU must not permit an entire generation of the northern community being reduced to poverty. It needs to come forward with a comprehensive package of aid and trade measures. They are playing a very constructive role in the Balkans and this has to be replicated in Cyprus as well.
The extent and severity of the restrictive measures imposed on the northern community in Cyprus has affected their living conditions. The UN Secretary General has described the population as being under a 'veritable siege.' A decision of the European Court of Justice
(Case C-432/92) has held that member states of the EU could not import fruit and vegetables from the northern side of Cyprus without a certificate (which is most unlikely) issued by the Greek Cypriot authorities. This has most unfortunately, even extended to an embargo against the participation of Turkish Cypriot sporting clubs in international events. Even cultural contacts are not permitted. There is need for re-thinking on these issues.
The international community, on the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations, needs to take appropriate steps to go beyond propaganda. There has to be more intensive public diplomacy and fewer complications arising out of de facto and de jure recognition questions. Meanwhile, the Turkish Cypriot community should be allowed to engage in direct economic, commercial, social and cultural contacts under the broad supervision of the United Nations. Similarly, to facilitate and encourage normalcy, permission should be accorded for establishing direct air and sea links with the northern community of Cyprus. This will facilitate tourism which can bring into that area much needed funds. These steps will also make the northern Cyprus community more self-reliant, less insecure and also help in the growth of its multinational and multicultural identifies.
Bangladesh, a moderate country with a large majority of Muslims, needs to assist in this process within the United Nations. We have already gone along with the consensus with regard to a resolution on the situation in Cyprus adopted during the 32nd Session of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers held in Sana'a, Yemen (28-30 June, 2005). We should now urge the UN Secretary General to finalise a comprehensive settlement plan that meets the core interests and concerns of the two sides in Cyprus and permits them to live side-by-side in security, peace and harmony without one having the ability to govern, exploit, oppress or threaten the other. Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador -- any response to mzamir@dhaka.net