US: PKK in Cyprus and Iraq

US reaffirms PKK headquarters in N. Iraq, presence in Greek Cyprus An annual US State Department report on global terrorism clearly registered the presence of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in northern Iraq, saying that the PKK -- now operating as Kongra-Gel (KGK/PKK) -- “operated from headquarters in part of northern Iraq and directed forces to target mainly Turkish security forces, government offices and villagers who opposed the KGK/PKK.”

Turkish soldiers from a light artillery battalion take their positions near military helicopters on a hill in northern Iraq during a cross-border operation against the PKK in 2002. T

he 312-page “2006 Country Reports on Terrorism,” released Monday, described the PKK as the “most prominent among terrorist groups in Turkey” -- a presence in northern Iraq of which has long been a handicap in Turkey's relations with both US and neighboring Iraq as Ankara's patience ran out last month, prompting it to deliver a diplomatic note of protest to the Baghdad government concerning the issue.

The report's section titled “Chapter 2 -- Country Reports: Europe and Eurasia Overview” started with a quote from Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül delivered September 2006 in remarks at the UN General Assembly's 61st session held in New York:

“We must always keep in mind that terrorism, as an age-old method of coercion, has no deeper links to any culture or religion. Hence we should be cautious not to associate any faith with terrorism.”

"Composed primarily of Kurds with a historically separatist agenda, the KGK/PKK operated from headquarters in part of northern Iraq and directed forces to target mainly Turkish security forces, government offices, and villagers who opposed the KGK/PKK. T

he Kurdistan Freedom Falcons (TAK), a group affiliated with the KGK, assumed responsibility for attacks on resort areas in southern and western Turkey, an attack on the office of a political party, and the bombing of a minibus carrying schoolchildren.

KGK/PKK attacks against Turkey increased significantly and claimed as many as 600 lives in 2006. In October, the KGK/PKK declared a unilateral cease-fire that slowed the intensity and pace of its attacks but attacks continued in response to Turkish security forces significant counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations, especially in the southeast,” the report said in the section on Turkey.

The PKK was also mentioned under the Cyprus section, referring to the EU-member Greek Cypriot government, which is not recognized by Ankara.

“The KGK/PKK maintained an active presence throughout [Greek] Cyprus and reportedly used the island as both a fundraising and transit point. Experts estimated the Kurdish community in the [Greek Cypriot] government-controlled area to number 1,500.

Among Kurdish-origin Turkish settlers in the north, the KGK/PKK reportedly enjoyed significant support. [Greek] Cyprus maintained that it was fulfilling all responsibilities with respect to the EU designation of the KGK/PKK as a terrorist organization,” the report said.

The PKK is designated as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the US and the EU.

Northern Cyprus PM Meets Greek Cypriot Teenagers

LEFKOSA - "The main conflict in Cyprus is (the presence of) those who want settlement and those who do not want it. Ideologies should be left aside in solution of this main conflict," said Prime Minister Ferdi Sabit Soyer of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC).

"Turkish and Greek Cypriots assume the most important duty in settlement of Cyprus problem," Soyer noted during a meeting with Greek Cypriot teenagers at his party's HQ (Republican Turkish Party headquarters).

Soyer stated that international community should also contribute to the solution process.
Ensuring peace in the island cannot be possible if Turkish and Greek Cypriots maintain their desire to dominate over each other, Soyer commented.

Soyer said that both Turkish and Greek Cypriots suffered in the past. "History should not be forgotten, but a new history, based on peace, cooperation and partnership, should be written with the lessons we take from history," he stressed.

Nationalism will be on the rise in both TRNC and Greek Cypriot administration if Cyprus problem is not solved, he added.

A great talent for going nowhere

WE HEARD countless platitudes in the last few days, inspired by the third anniversary of the referendum on the Annan plan, which gave rise to the customary festival of triumphal rhetoric and emotional posturing.

The general verdict of the pro-government camp was that we were now in a much stronger position having saved the Cyprus Republic and having joined the EU, while anyone who expressed doubts about this was an enemy of the state and a propagandist for the Turkish side.

Despite the avalanche of words, we did not hear the government or any of its cheerleaders tell us where the national problem was heading or how they would achieve the end of the division, which, supposedly, remained the long-term objective. ‘Long-term’ is the key phrase here, because nobody in the Cyprus government seems to be in a great hurry for a settlement, despite conceding, in rare moments of frankness, that time is working against us.

Most people can see through the government’s conflicting messages. An opinion poll, commissioned by UNFICYP, found that 70 per cent of Greek Cypriots did not believe there would be a settlement of the Cyprus problem in the foreseeable future. Most of the Turkish Cypriots (57 per cent) also took this view, making this the only question on which the majorities of both communities agreed.

There is complete disagreement on the most desirable type of settlement – the overwhelming majority of Greek Cypriots (72 per cent) considered a unitary state acceptable, while most Turkish Cypriots (67 per cent) rejected it; 59 per cent of Turkish Cypriots considered a two-state solution satisfactory, while 73 per cent of Greek Cypriots rejected it.

This left us with the much-maligned bi-communal, bi-zonal federation, which according to the survey, is found tolerable, a necessary evil, by the majority of both communities. But it will certainly not be the federation described, in detail, in the Annan plan, as this is no longer on the negotiating table, but, as the Government Spokesman memorably remarked, “on the autopsy table”.

This poses a serious problem as far as a settlement is concerned, because the Turkish Cypriots have been labouring under the illusion that the plan was alive and well and on the negotiating table. President Papadopoulos delayed so long in proposing the substantive changes he wanted made to it so the plan would be acceptable to the Greek Cypriots that it died.

But the government and its supporters have now found a new lollipop to suck on – the July 8 agreement, which, in a little over couple of months, will be celebrating its first anniversary. The agreement was supposedly aimed at preparing the ground for negotiations, but the two sides have yet to agree what technical committees and working groups that would have done the preparation work would discuss.

A few weeks ago, Mehmet Ali Talat announced he was considering abandoning the agreement, presumably unable to cope with 90-plus chapters Papadopoulos had submitted for discussion by the working groups.

As the Annan plan was dead, the president seized the opportunity to negotiate a settlement plan from scratch.This is never going to happen without the agreement of the Turkish Cypriot side, but the president had no problems presenting the deadlock as a diplomatic victory.

“We are setting the agenda for the Cyprus issue,” he boasted in an interview to Simerini last Sunday, adding that Nicosia now had the initiative.

But what initiative was he talking about – the initiative in making a settlement impossible and blaming the Turkish Cypriot side for it?

He has been successful in this respect, by turning the July 8 agreement into a talks-preparation procedure that would never end; and Talat would pull out of the procedure and carry the blame for not honouring his signature.

The pro-government camp may admire the president’s ingenious plan to turn the peace process into a never-ending procedural squabble and blame-game that leads nowhere. Nowhere is exactly the place Papadopoulos wants to take us and 70 per cent of the Greek Cypriots have recognised this, as the UNFICYP poll suggests.

The truth is very few of them were complaining last week as the anniversary of the referendum was marked, which could only be interpreted as a vote of confidence in the government.

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.

Themistocleous lays down challenge to Cyprus presidency

Former Agriculture Minister and deputy leader of the United Democrats, Costas Themistocleous, declared his candidacy for the next presidential election in February 2008.

Themistocleous, whose small party failed to get into parliament in May 2006 and has been attacked by the ruling coalition, said that “we have to bring the Cyprus problem back on track towards a solution by Autumn 2008 and not 15 years from now.”

He said that his platform is clear and wants to see the implementation of the changes to the United Nations’ plan as agreed to by the Greek Cypriot National Council, the advisory body to the president on the Cyprus problem.

Themistocleous said he will call on the U.N. to revive the peace process and allow for a six-month period to discuss and agree on changes to the ‘Annan Plan’, that was rejected by the majority fo the Greek Cypriot in April 2004, but embraced by most fo the Turkish Cypriots.

“We should exhaust the discussion on the changes that have been proposed and which the Turkish Cypriot side is willing to discuss, after which we should go back to a new referendum,” he said.

Themistocloeus said there is a conflict in the government’s handling of the Cyprus problem, with the coalition’s main partner, the communist AKEL party, in a dialogue with the Turkish Cypriot Republican Party on how a new U.N. plan with the necessary changes could become the basis for a solution.

As regards support from other political groupings, the main opposition party, Democratic Rally (DISY) deputy president Averof Neophytou said that, “if Mr. Themistocleous approaches our party through a democratic process, we will not refuse to listen to him.”

One of DISY’s leading members, former Foreign Minister and present-day MEP for the European Popular Party Ioannis Kasoulides, has expressed interest to run in the next presidential elections as an independent candidate.

He will be facing incumbent Tassos Papadopoulos who is hoping to get re-elected on the coalition ticket of the AKEL, his own Democratic Party (DIKO) and the smaller socialist EDEK.

However, many die-hard communists want their party Secretary General and House president Demetris Christofias also to run for president in an effort to show voter strength in the first round.

The president of Cyprus is the chief executive of the government and is elected by direct vote. If no one candidate gets 50% plus one vote in the first round, then the two leading candidates go to a second round, two weeks later. All adults over the age of 18 can vote and voting is limited to the territory of the Republic of Cyprus.

Tassos Papadopoulos is the fifth president.

Archbishop Makarios III reigned from Independence in 1960 to his death in August 1977. He was succeeded by Spyros Kyprianou (1977 – 1988), followed by economist George Vassiliou (1988-1993) and veteran statesman Glafcos Clerides (1993-2003).

Cyprus' ethnically divided communities not expect to be reunified

Cyprus' ethnically divided communities do not expect the Mediterranean island to be reunified soon.

The United Nations-commissioned poll found that 57 percent of Greek Cypriots and 70 percent of Turkish Cypriots do not see a settlement of the decades-old problem in the near future.

The island has been divided into a Greek Cypriot south and a Turkish Cypriot north since 1974.
The island has been divided into a Greek Cypriot south represented by the internationally recognized government and a Turkish Cypriot north since 1974, when Turkey invaded after a failed Athens-backed coup by supporters of union with Greece.

The poll was published on the third anniversary of separate referenda, in which Greek Cypriots overwhelmingly rejected a U.N.-brokered peace plan. Turkish Cypriots approved the plan.
Reunification efforts have made no progress since.

CYMAR Market Research and Prologue Consulting conducted the survey between Jan. 26 and Feb.19, using a sample of 1,000 Greek Cypriots and 1,000 Turkish Cypriots, as well as 350 members of both communities living in the U.N.-patrolled buffer zone that separates north from south. No margin of error was given.

The survey found that most people in both communities see day-to-day contact as essential to pave the way for reunification, but there is little cooperation between the two groups.

Ninety percent of Turkish Cypriots and 87 percent of Greek Cypriots said they have not had any substantial personal or professional contacts with each other.

"It just seems that the mechanism ... has not yet been created to effectively allow such contacts to take place," said Alexandros Lordos, a polling consultant.

He said respondents who did have contacts with members of the other community usually reported a subsequent increase in trust in that community.

Cyprus: UN poll finds majority backing in both communities for federal settlement

A federal settlement is the only proposal to resolve the Cyprus problem that enjoys majority support in both communities on the Mediterranean island, but there is widespread scepticism that any solution is imminent, according to an inter-communal survey conducted by the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP).

The survey of 1,000 Greek Cypriots, 1,000 Turkish Cypriots and 300 people living within the UN Buffer Zone (100 Turkish Cypriots and 250 Greek Cypriots), conducted in February and released today, found that both communities consider the UN has an important role to play and welcomed its continuing presence across the island.

But a majority of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots believed the UN was biased in favour of the other community, and they were also wary of the true intentions and preferences of the other side.
The survey was commissioned by UNFICYP to gauge how Cypriots feel about the Mission and the rest of the UN presence on the island, and on their attitudes towards a possible peaceful resolution of the Cyprus problem.

The poll found that “a strong majority” of Greek Cypriots said a unitary State solution was satisfactory, but a similar proportion of Turkish Cypriots viewed such an outcome as unacceptable. Most Turkish Cypriots preferred a two-State arrangement, but most Greek Cypriots said they regarded that idea as untenable.

Yet a majority on both sides saw a federal settlement as “the second best option and would be prepared to accept such a constitutional framework, at the very least as a compromise solution,” according to a press release summarizing the poll results.

Supporters among Greek Cypriots (65 per cent) tended to regard a federal settlement as “tolerable,” whereas Turkish Cypriot supporters (70 per cent) usually viewed it as “satisfactory.” Only small minorities of either community believed the status quo was the answer.

“Rejecting a federal solution out of hand, under any circumstances and regardless of the specific plan, is not a majority viewpoint in either community,” the release added.

The survey showed that a majority on both sides did not want UNFICYP to withdraw before the restoration of normal conditions and a peaceful settlement, but that they also wanted the UN to do more to understand Cypriot concerns across the island.

Examples proposed included outreach programmes to villages and towns, in-depth research into the concerns of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots and an interactive website promoting inter-communal dialogue.

Contacts between the two communities are seen as essential to improving levels of trust and to “pave the way for a united Cyprus, and there is approval for those who reach out the other community through such contacts,” the release noted. But despite this goodwill, few of those interviewed were actually involved in such contacts.

The opening of crossing points may also not have created much of a boost in confidence, the poll found, with only one in 10 Greek Cypriots crossing regularly and 45 per cent of Turkish Cypriots, with many on both sides saying the trips had not enhanced their views of their neighbours.