July 8, Morphou, Famagusta and our stupidity

By Nicos A Rolandis

A tragedy in three acts

ACT ONE – SCENE ONE: Summer 1981.

UN Secretary-general Kurt Waldheim is in the last year of his second term of office. The Cyprus problem is at a complete standstill. In December 1978, we had rejected the Anglo-American-Canadian plan, as a result of a negative interference by AKEL and by the Soviet Union.

In May 1979, Waldheim arrived reluctantly in Cyprus (I had a meeting with him in Geneva a month earlier and I convinced him to come) for the signature of the high level Agreement by Kyprianou and Denktash. Nothing happened in the wake of the Agreement. AKEL, which was seeking a solution but would not tolerate the 1978 plan of the “imperialists”, clashed with Kyprianou for his inaction. They levelled harsh accusations at each other.

In May 1980, each one went his own way.Waldheim had to do something. He did not want to leave a vacuum behind him. After all, this had been the standard practice of the United Nations: to save their own credibility and prestige when the supposedly “interested parties” were not really interested. So, the “Evaluation” of Waldheim emerged.

It was a long document with limited political substance. Both Kyprianou and Denktash took a negative stance. Interlocutor George Ioannides paid regular visits to my office enquiring how he should handle the various issues. But there were no guidelines from the President. Eventually, there was no way out of the hundreds of points of difference which were recorded.

Waldheim, though, had accomplished his mission.

ACT ONE-SCENE TWO: Summer 2006

(have 25 years really gone by?), UN Secretary-general Kofi Annan is in the last year of his second term of office. The Cyprus problem is once again at a complete standstill. In April 2004, we had rejected the Annan plan (the seventh plan we had rejected – truly there was nothing left, we had rejected all of them) despite the fact that the plan bore the stamp of a unanimous approval of the Security Council – Resolution 1475.

The Rally Party and the Free Democrats accepted the Plan. The President shed tears and dumped it. AKEL did not shed any tears. On the contrary, it glorified the plan, like nobody else did, stating that “the plan reunites Cyprus, it will rid us of the Turkish occupation forces, it will restore human rights”.

AKEL upheld the plan by a 71.5 per cent majority at its Political Bureau. AKEL also wanted to “cement” the plan. But on the following day it rejected it, so that its Ministers could stay in the Cabinet! AKEL also charged that the people of Cyprus had been brainwashed to reject the plan. Kofi Annan had to do something, like Waldheim did, to avoid a vacuum on the eve of his departure. So he presented the “8th of July”.

It is a simple piece of paper, which contains some basic principles, known to all of us since 1977: that the solution will be “bizonal and bicommunal” (even the cats in our houses are well conversant with this) and that the “status quo” is not acceptable (as if it could ever be acceptable).

There will be a large number of Technical (?) Committees and Working Groups which have to address more than 120 chapters piled up in the meantime. There are also sub-divisions of these chapters and the grand total runs into the hundreds. A chaotic abyss. To remove any suspicion that my above conclusions are driven by an oppositionist disposition, I cite a comment on March 13, 2007 in a pro-government large-circulation daily:

“We repeat what has become clear to our unsophisticated mind. The Technical Committees and the Working Groups are sheer nonsense, so that time will go by and people will have the illusion that something is happening on Cyprus.”

So, let us go ahead with the “sheer nonsense”.

After all this is what we wanted. Everybody is happy, including Kofi Annan, who has accomplished his mission and at the same time has punished us.

ACT TWO – SCENE ONE: Morphou.

As I wrote in a previous article of mine, in 1981 we put up a fight, because at that time the first UN map (Gobbi map) for the Cyprus territorial arrangement was in the wings.

I had dozens of meetings with Hugo Gobbi the Special Representative of Waldheim on the subject, so that Morphou could be included under Greek Cypriot administration. Gobbi dithered – he felt that Morphou would be the main wealth producing area of the north. We, on the other hand, knew that without the massive return of the Morphou refugees, there could be no solution.

I had George Ioannides, Michael Triantafyllides, Stella Soulioti and Alecos Shambos working with me on the subject. Then, on October 2, 1981, at 7pm at the Pierre Hotel in New York, Gobbi instructed Shambos, in my presence, to draw the line on the map.

Morphou and the villages of the area were on the Greek Cypriot side. Both Shambos and myself shed some tears (not the same as those of President Papadopoulos). The map was confirmed by Waldheim a few days later.

ACT TWO – SCENE TWO: 2004.

In the Annan plan, Morphou is under Greek Cypriot administration, exactly as it was recorded on the Gobbi map.

However, we rejected the plan which was so strongly praised by AKEL. So Morphou was gone together with the overall rejection. Nowadays, according to press reports, new settlers are moving into Morphou, the houses are repaired for a long term stay of the Turkish Cypriot inhabitants and investments of hundreds of millions of dollars are under way. Under such circumstances, the 1981 success will be reversed.

It appears that we have learned nothing from history.

ACT THREE: Famagusta.

The Lady of the Sea. We betrayed her seven times in the past, more times than Peter renounced Christ. The last one (Annan plan) was the most tragic. Its lawful residents would have returned to their homes two and a half years ago.

Instead, today they collect signatures. “You sign… and you… and you…” Who are they trying to convince? Themselves? Because people abroad will not be convinced, all things considered. They refused to embark on the last train and they now try to find a bicycle to catch up.

Good luck.

EPILOGUE:

Ancient Greek Tragedies ended with catharsis. Aristotle says that “catharsis constitutes the purging of suffering arising from the drama. Catharsis in tragedies comes after a long process, so that viewers will feel mercy and compassion for the unfolding drama.”So, what is it that fits our case? The “mercy and compassion” of Aristotle?

And which catharsis and which God will purge us all, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, after 44 years of sins and blunders? How shall we be vindicated in the atmosphere of incoherence which persists all over? I wonder whether the three great tragic Poets of Ancient Greece, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, acting all of them together, can answer this question.