Excerpts from the interview of the General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL A.Kyprianou to “Simerini” newspaper, Sunday 16 September 2018

* Any possible abandonment of the agreed sought goal for a bizonal, bicommunal solution to the Cyprus problem would be disastrous for Cyprus

* We agree and advocate that the solution cannot be a precondition for the continuation of the guarantees. No one can and should have the right, after the solution, to intervene in the interior of Cyprus

* A small country, which is asserting its rights and just cause, only has one way to attain its goals. Our shield of protection and the strongest weapon we have at our disposal is International Law and the Charter of the United Nations. And we must always defend them.

————————————————————–

You have criticized the President of the Republic severely for his handling of the Cyprus problem and withdrawn the support you had rendered. Do you believe he has deviated from the framework of the agreed solution, even from the solution of Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation (BBF) itself?

AK: A lot is being heard and a rumor is doing the rounds that the President of the Republic will move away from the framework of the solution of Bizonal, Bicommunal federation. However, I want to be honest in this respect: The President himself has not raised officially such an issue, to date. However, we are concerned because we believe that such a development even at the level of rumors would be disastrous. We do not share the view expressed by certain forces and circles that the agreed sought goal should be abandoned and that it will be easy to realize some other goal. I repeat, abandoning the agreed goal means the definitive partition of Cyprus, and this will not be the end of the road, but on the contrary the starting point for new dangerous reckless adventures for Cyprus.

The only solution is Bizonal. Bicommunal Federation

The President of the Republic, according to what he proclaims from time to time, will not consent to a solution that (a) will not be functional, thus unsustainable, and (b) will put at risk the energy prospects of the Republic of Cyprus. Do you disagree with all this?

AK: The only way for the President to achieve this is to reach a solution based on bizonal, bicommunal federation. H cannot manage to do that in any other way. And I am absolute in what I say. For example, do we believe that the two-state solution, which is expressed as a view by certain forces and circles, is easy to achieve? On what principles and bases will it be agreed? It is naive to believe that with the two state solution we will have the ownership/tenure of natural wealth.

In addition, it is also an illusion to believe that if we opt for a two-state solution, one (state) will be Greek Cypriot and the other Turkish Cypriot. No. One will be Greek Cypriot, in which many others will live in as well from all over the world, and the other will be fully controlled by Turkey. And there will be the danger, in the future, that Turkey will also have designs and aspirations to the rest of Cyprus. Therefore, the only way to achieve what Mr. Anastasiades has stated is through a bizonal, bicommunal federal solution.

Termination of guarantees

The Foreign Minister of Greece, in his meeting with UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy on Cyprus Mrs. Lute set certain preconditions for the convening of a new conference, pointing out the need for a “substantial and productive preparation” to be preceded before the negotiation on the Cyprus problem. She also said that Greece’s position is that the so-called Treaty of Alliance and so-called Treaty of Guarantees must be abolished. Do you agree with Athens’ approach?

AK: The first one who raised the issue of the abolition of the guarantees and intervention rights was Mr. Christofias, when he was President of the Republic. We agree completely that the solution cannot be conditional on the continuation of the guarantees. No one can and must have the right, after the solution, to intervene in the internal affairs of Cyprus. Now, as to whether intensive negotiations should come first.

I understand that Greek Foreign Minister Mr. Kotzias is referring to the issues of guarantees. It is up to the guarantors themselves to make the necessary contacts in order to prepare the ground for the convening of a new conference with the prospect of all these issues being resolved. The Secretary-General of the UN is very specific as to what he himself is calling for. He says that, in order to initiate the resumption of negotiations, as regards the substance, he will continue on the basis of the Guterres framework, the convergences achieved between Christofias-Talat and Anastasiades-Akinci, as well as the informal document which he tried to submit at the Crans Montana conference in relation to the implementation of the agreement.

As for the negotiation procedure, the UN Secretary-General says that we should have two tables where on one table security and guarantee issues will be discussed with a specific composition, and on the other table the internal aspects of the Guterres framework will be discussed with another composition. Furthermore the third, very important, in my view, he raised as a precondition, is that all the involved parties must convince him that this time if we start the procedure, they will have the political will to go all the way to the very end.

From there onwards, each one of us can say what he/she wants. However, the UN Secretary-Secretary will only give the signal for the resumption of the negotiating procedure only under these preconditions. And none of us can ignore this.

European “turn” for Turkey

Bearing in mind the geo-political and energy given developments under way in the region, as well as the growing crisis in Turkey, do you consider that favorable conditions are being created for the successful outcome of the effort (for a solution of the Cyprus problem)?

AK: Developments could move in any direction, depending on whether Mr. Erdogan wants to move things forward. The tensions observed in US-Turkish relations, at least for the time being, appears to be pushing Erdogan not only towards Russia, but also towards the EU. It seems that the interest in Ankara’s European perspective is rekindling, and this was also recorded in the clear statements made by Turkish Foreign Minister Mr. Mevlut Cavusoglu.

We believe that this interest could be utilized. If clear and consistent messages are conveyed by the EU to Ankara that we are here, ready to discuss with you about the European perspective of the country, provided that you meet all the criteria that have been set and, of course, that you normalize your relations with Cyprus through a just, workable and viable solution, then I think this will be to our benefit. However, to be to our benefit, we must encourage such a development. If we, instead of encouraging, are undermining or making it difficult, you realize that things will become more difficult.

Multidimensional foreign policy

The news over the past few days have been dominated by your public confrontation with the President of DISY party about the value, geopolitical and ideological orientation of Cyprus. With regards the substance of the issue, does the strategic convergence of Russia-Turkey and signing of important agreements between them worry you?

AK: But Russia hasn’t been signing agreements with Turkey just today. This has been going on for some twenty years. Let me remind you that the controversial agreement surrounding the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant wasn’t made today, but around twenty years ago. However, this hasn’t affected Russia’s stand and positions (on the Cyprus problem) in the UN Security Council. It is Russia that has supported us during critical times, from the punitive aspirations of the US (against the Republic of Cyprus).

Consequently, we need to see in the long run what stand everyone takes on various issues and not to judge them on the basis of developments of the moment. In addition, a small country, which is asserting its rights and just cause, only has one way to attain its goals. Our shield of protection and the strongest weapon we have at our disposal is International Law and the Charter of the United Nations. And we must always defend them.

The country which has flagrantly violated over the past three decades, but also beforehand, International Law and the UN Charter is the US – both in the case of Iraq and Yugoslavia, as well as in the case of Libya and Syria and many others. In the case of Cyprus, what has happened? Wasn’t it the US that was behind the conspiracies for the twin crime committed against us in 1974? We must therefore insist on these things. We cannot identify with the policies that the US wants, simply because Cyprus is a member of the EU.

We do not under no circumstances argue that we must attach ourselves to Russia. But, neither should we attach ourselves to the US. And we insist that we must pursue a multidimensional foreign policy that should be based on International Law and the UN Charter, so that we assert support from other countries too on the issues affecting us based on these principles. Let us not forget, in addition, that the West is at the moment divided. The US is in confrontation not only with China, Russia, Iran and Turkey, but also with the EU itself.

The responsibilities of the Government-Finance Ministry for the sell-off of the Cyprus Cooperative Bank

Let’s get to the burning issue of the economy, namely the issue of the Cooperative Bank, about which you have criticized the Government for its handling. Do you consider that the Minister of Finance, apart from whatever political responsibilities, also has other responsibilities, and must resign?

AK: AKEL will never engage in such a logic. We say that in 2013 the government decided to give a total of 1.75 billion Euros to acquire full ownership of the Cyprus Cooperative Bank. From there onwards, it was informing us that everything was proceeding very well. They were telling us that the Cooperative Bank is working professionally, that for the first time things are operating correctly, and, in general, they were expressing their positions in a triumphant way about how they themselves were handling the issues relating to the bank.

Indeed, at some stage they said that they would return 25% to the lawful owners, the shareholders. And while they were saying all this, and we had meetings in the Presidential Palace to see how to address the problem of non-performing loans, it suddenly announces the sale of the Cooperative Bank which in the end was not a sale, not even a sellout. Not only was the Coop Bank sold off, but the sellers also paid the buyer on top of all that as well for the Hellenic Bank to get the Coop Bank.

And since Mr. Anastasiades, DISY President Neophytou and Finance Minister Georgiades – who was the press spokesperson for DISY back then – were telling us with empty talk for years that everyone is judged by the results of their actions, we are doing just that right now: we are judging them by the results of their actions. These actions, unfortunately, will cost the Cypriot people 8 billion euros. Whatever they say, this stark reality doesn’t change and we hold them responsible. From there onwards, I consider that if they had any sensitivity, Mr. Georgiades and Mr. Anastasiades would take on their responsibilities before the Cypriot people.

In the vote on the Bill concerning the Cooperative Bank, you said from the podium of the House of Parliament that AKEL will rebuild Cooperatives. Did you say that knowingly and aware of the real picture of the problems?

AK: I said that AKEL would study the possibility of rebuilding the Cooperative movement and I certainly said it knowingly. We have asked for opinions from experts. We have set out the preconditions that must exist for us to back such a project, but it is not an easy task – we must be honest. I declare, however, that AKEL will take the lead in the effort so that the people themselves will undertake to build the Co-operative movement once again. We will study, we will propose and, if we find those people who will be ready to promote such a project, we will support it.

The Government is intransigent on the crisis in Education

As regards the other major issue, namely Education, the attempt to breach the deadlock has collapsed. As the main opposition party, are you going to take any initiative to solve the crisis?

AK: First of all, I want to point out that every reasonable person should be concerned about how the situation is evolving in the field of education. There is a danger that this year’s school year will develop in extremely difficult conditions, and eventually school students will suffer the damage. Therefore, a solution needs to be found. Now, how will this happen…We need to see who is the one who has caused and provoked the crisis and who is the one who has the responsibility to work to find the solution.

Our view is that the responsibility for the smooth functioning of institutions lies with the given government…It is the responsibility therefore of the Government, bearing in mind where developments have reached, to see what it can do to overcome the difficulties. You ask me if AKEL is ready to take any initiative so as to overcome the problems.

As a Party, together with all the opposition parties, we told the government to suspend the decisions it took, while we recommended that the educational organizations suspend the measures they had announced, pointing out to both to record both the substantive issues of education and the issues related to labour issues, in order to commence a structured dialogue, that should aim at solving the problems by the start of the new school year (2019).

However, the Government did not accept this specific proposal, insisting on its own position. For AKEL to undertake a new initiative, we must see that there is a willingness on the part of the Government to move away from its positions. However, we note that the government side remains intransigent, addressing the whole issue guided by its obsessions. Therefore, we cannot take an initiative, which we will know in advance that it will end in failure. We saw, moreover, what was the outcome of Mr. Sizopoulos’ effort.