PULSE of TURKEY No 49............. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8th 1998
PRESIDENT DENKTAS LAUNCHES CYPRUS CONFEDERATION
President Denktaþ’s timely move was devoid of extremism and contained suggestions to address the needs of all the parties concerned with the Cyprus problem. The Greek refusal was prompt, but emotional rather than rational. International reception was a quiet and reserved approval and promising for the future. The proposal kills several birds with one stone and paves the way for eliminating several thorny questions such as S-300 missiles and accessions to the EU. Wahington, Moscow and other main capitals keep quiet, manifesting tacit approval.President Denktaþ took a historic step on August 31st by making a peace call to the Greek Cypriot side and proposing “to establish together a Confederation in Cyprus.” Standing beside him was the Turkish Foreign Minister, Ismail Cem, who stressed, “My presence here is an expression of the Turkish Government’s support and trust for President Denktaþ.”
The five-point plan had been prepared with the utmost care and in strict secrecy, but it caused no surprise as multilateral preparations were going on for a long time.
President Denktaþ’s proposal “for a lasting solution in Cyprus” reads:
“As a final effort to achieve a mutually acceptable lasting solution in Cyprus I propose the establishment of the Cyprus Confederation based on the following arrangements:
The ultimate aim of the negotiations will thus be a partnership settlement which will be a confederated structure composed of two peoples and of two states of the island supported by symmetrical agreements with the two motherlands and guarantor states. All rights and powers that are not referred to the confederal entity will reside with the two confederated states. Any agreement to be reached as a result of the negotiations will be submitted for approval in separate referanda.
By participating in these negotiations the parties will acknowledge that the Greek and Turkish Cypriot sides are two sovereign and equal states, each with its own functioning democratic institutions and jurisdiction, reflecting the political equality and will of their respective peoples. They will also acknowledge that the authorities of one party do not represent the other.
We believe that only this structure
If the Greek Cypriots agree to this final basis, we are ready to begin negotiations to establish the Cyprus Confederation.”
Last chance for prevention of an irrevocable partition of Cyprus
President Denktaþ described these proposals as the last chance for safeguarding the territorial integrity and separate identity of Cyprus within the international community heading for the new century. He said, “If my proposal is not accepted the current situation on the island becomes final. Then our integration process with Turkey will be completed.”
Deputy PM Bülent Ecevit, who went to the island with a powerful delegation a few days after the proclamation of the historic proposal, also confirmed what Denktaþ said, “A confederation is the last chance for the prevention of the final division of the island and the solution of the Cyprus problem.”
As for the chances of success of this “last chance”, it is simply very high. Apart from the Greeks and the Greek Cypriots who readily declared that it was a move to legitimize the present illegal status in Northern Cyprus, the only objection came from France which maintained that it was against UN Secruity Council resolution 541 adopted on November 18th, 1983, three days after the Turkish Cypriot UDI (Universal –-not Unilateral-- Declaration of Independence).
Another objection to the proposal for a confederation in Cyprus came from the Nonaligned Summit which happened to be in session in Durban, South Africa a few days after President Denktaþ’s historic announcement. The Greek Cypriot leader Clerides who attended the Summit managed to pass a consensus through the conference against the Turkish proposal, but such huge gatherings like the Islamic Conference or the Nonaligned Movement are not taken seriously.
If these resolutions, or rather consensuses were of any practical value Turkey should have been at war with Israel by now, but last week PM Mesut Yýlmaz was PM Netanyahu’s official guest in Tel Aviv. They were making very important and enforceable arrangements which were causing fears and complaints to rise from Damascus, but Yýlmaz brushed them off by remarking, “I don’t care what Syria says.” It was a new sign that Turkey’s patience was running out with President Assad’s support of the PKK and of the tightening ring around Syria, though both Turkey and Israel were repeatedly announcing that their cooperation was against no one.
Ironically President Denktaþ was the only one who attached any importance to the Nonaligned Summit and reminded the world that it was the nonaligned resolution that induced the Turkish Cypriots to proclaim independence in 1983. He said the nonaligned resolution reducing the Turkish soldiers in Cyprus to the position of an occupation force was the last straw at that time and that they were obliged to proclaim independence. If the same mistake recurred now and this opportunity was also missed the Turkish and Turkish Cypriot integration would be final and irreversible. “It is our duty not to succumb to unilateral and biased resolutions,” he stressed.
Superpower stance towards the proposal for a confederation
Excluding the French reference to the Security Council Resolution 541 and some very mild remarks from the American Ambassador in Athens, calling for a bicommunal and bizonal federation in Cyprus there was no serious negative reaction to Denktaþ’s proposal.
Washington, Moscow, Beijing, London, Bonn , Brussels, and strangely enough Vienna were all in a tacit approval of silence, despite Greece’s approaches to the Austrian Prime Minister that he should raise his voice against it as the EU President.
The reason for the success of Denktaþ’s move was that the document was drafted “with the skill of a statesman of Denktaþ’s calibre,” as Ecevit put it. Indeed, the document was compact, to the point, not provocative in the least and kept in sight international commitments, resolutions and the interests of all the parties concerned.
As against the French Foreign Ministry spokesman’s bringing up the 16-year old Security Council Resolution 541 opposing the UDI, it was not in anyway against the latest Security Council Resolution 1179 on Cyprus, adopted on June 29th, 1998.
In this Resolution the Security Council “Reaffirms its position that a Cyprus settlement must be based on a State of Cyprus with a single sovereignty and international personality and a single citizenship, with its independence and territorial integrity safeguarded, comprising two politically equal communities as described in the relevent Security Council resolutions, in a bicommunal and bizonal federation and that such a settlement must exclude union in whole or in part with any other country or any form of partition or secession.”
Denktaþ’s settlement for Cyprus within a Confederation conforms word for word to the Security Council’s above definition for the State of Cyprus.
What is the difference between a federation and a confederation?
If a difference is to be sought between the two documents it is the terms federation and confederation. But who knows what a federation is and what a confederation is, other than a general definition that the former is a tighter union and the latter looser.
These concepts often overlap. Switzerland is called “Confédération Helvetic”, but it is a cantonal federation. In the American civil war federal and confederal forces fought each other, but whose central government was tighter than the other, no one knows.
The historic trend is that national unions in countries like Australia, Canada and the USA start as a confederation and change into a federation in the course of time. The German and Italian reunifications in 1870 followed a similar course. The EU may well transform into a European Confederation and then a Federation in future.
Ecevit said in Nicosia last week that Turkish helicopters fought the forest fire in the Greek Cypriot sector this summer, but still could not prevent the damage spreading to the Turkish sector. The same is the case in pesticide spraying, water shortages and natural disasters on the island. Above all, the distrust and animosity between the two national communities should be eliminated and then the rest is easy. A happy union may then be able to be worked out, probably within the EU, whether it is called a federation or a confederation.
Who is behind the “confederation”?
The promising start of Denktaþ’s proposal last week was not only due to his remarkable statesmanship as Ecevit made a point of, but there were other and deeper reasons. All the indications are that the USA is behind this move.
Of course, both Washinton and Ankara will strongly deny it now for the sake of making the future course easier by reducing the Greek objection, but
Holbrook had been giving the signs of these developments by calling Clerides “Mr Clerides” along with “Mr Denktaþ”, dropping the title “President.” He was shocking the Greek Cypriots by forgetting that they were the “de jure” Government and the TRNC was “de facto”. In fact, it was him who first suggested the idea of a confederation, but it was rejected at that time.
As a matter of fact, none of the big powers care whether Denktaþ’s powers within the Federation of Cyprus are big or small. The United Kingdom did not even use its treaty right to attend the intercommunal talks in Cyprus, saying that whichever arrangements the two sides worked out for the Cyprus Administration were acceptable to London.
The American and Russian positions were no different. Moscow told Ankara on several occasions that they were not bothered about the limits of the federation in Cyprus, as long as it was not partition or Enosis (union with Greece). The same was the case for almost all major capitals of the world.
This being the case, the future of Denktaþ’s proposal is bright and it may not take long to finalize this initiative. The UN General Secretary, Kofi Anon, will hand over a report to the Security Council on December 10th about Cyprus and no one should be surprised if he announces an unbelievable breakthrough in his report.
Neither should anyone be surprised to see the American Ambassador, Mark Parris, confessing (in great joy) to a mistaken remark shortly after his starting duty in Ankara:
“I would be less than dishonest if I did not acknowledge that, looking ahead, I can see factors which could make 1998 a year of opportunity lost. These factors are the complex of issues relating to Greece, the Aegean and Cyprus.” uras@ada.net.tr, September 8th, 1998