|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
U.S. Embassy
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
The Annan Plan: Securing Cyprus' Future for All
Remarks by Ambassador Michael Klosson
at the Turkish Cypriot Nicosia Bar Association
Good afternoon. It’s a pleasure to be here today with such a distinguished group. Truth be told, I haven’t been in a room with this many lawyers since my confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate last year, and we know how much fun those sessions are! Today’s, I’m sure, will be equally lively.
Lawyers, like diplomats, are trained to fight zealously on behalf of their clients. They are also taught how to negotiate compromise solutions to complex problems that can be beneficial to all. We need to put the latter skills to better work on the Cyprus problem.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we are going through a crucial period in this island’s history, which could well result in the sustainable settlement that has eluded many decades of past attempts. We believe the appropriate, necessary and workable compromise arrangements for a settlement that protects the rights of both Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots are embodied in the Annan Plan.
So, I would like today to discuss the way forward based on that plan and address some misperceptions about the plan itself.
Way Forward: Annan Plan
-----------------------------------
The plan is a comprehensive document that provides both a blueprint for a functioning government and a roadmap to a brighter future in the European Union for Turkish and Greek Cypriots. It does this by embracing the idea of a bi-zonal, bi-communal island with a single international personality. That idea has been a touchstone for both sides of the Cyprus dispute for many years.
Meetings in Copenhagen last December and The Hague in March represented the best chance for a settlement. They were not, however, the final chances. A window of opportunity remains open through at least next May when the Republic of Cyprus will formally enter the European Union. If that window closes with no action being taken, a tremendous opportunity will have been lost -- an opportunity to build a better future for all.
Despite disappointment over The Hague’s outcome, we believe a settlement can be achieved in the time remaining provided both sides summon the necessary political will to work on the basis of the Annan plan. A variety of developments, both off and on the island, hopefully will continue to push towards resolution. Let me review them.
Pushing For Solution
---------------------------
The key external factors are the impending EU accession of Cyprus and Turkey’s progress towards EU membership. There should be no misunderstanding on this point, however. Until May, Cyprus’ accession to the EU adds to momentum behind the Annan Plan. After May, the situation becomes more complicated, to say the least. The formal accession of the Republic of Cyprus to the EU next May will fundamentally alter the negotiating landscape on the island.
The Annan Plan includes provisions that diverge from European norms.
Everyone understands that such departures are necessary to preserve the agreed bi-zonal nature of the solution. The EU Presidency just last week reiterated the EU’s willingness to accommodate such a settlement. If the Annan plan is completed and supported in referenda on both sides before next May, then the settlement can be integrated into the accession process. Its provisions will carry the legal weight of treaty obligations ratified by the 25 EU member states. After next May, that opportunity will be gone.
On the island, the prospect of a solution has become more concrete for both Turkish and Greek Cypriots. A solution is no longer an abstract goal to which everyone pays lip service. It is no longer something left to everyone’s imagination, or dreams. A real solution – one with tremendous benefits and opportunities, and, yes, also some uncertainties and costs – is now at hand. It is tangible. It can be realized.
With the Annan plan on the table, everyone can now visualize the precise framework of the solution, how the United Cyprus Republic’s institutions will be organized, what safeguards exist to protect one’s rights, etc. And there’s something more – with last April’s relaxation of restrictions on travel across the buffer zone, large numbers of Turkish and Greek Cypriots have recent, first-hand experience with those with whom they will share the island. They can put faces on “the other side.”
And, after more than one and a half million crossings, the experience has been overwhelmingly positive. That experience certainly defies claims that Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots can’t work together or live in peace in modern day Europe.
Don’t get me wrong. Safeguards are required. Given Cyprus’s difficult past – 1958, 1963, 1967, 1974 – there must be safeguards. But look at the plan in light of recent events: there is a secure and functional structure available to be established on a foundation of recently confirmed goodwill between individuals. That is the way to a better future, a way to avoid repeating the past.
The United States works daily, and I mean daily, to seek a Cyprus solution based on the Annan Plan before next May. Secretary Powell discussed such a settlement over the past two weeks with the Turkish and Greek Foreign Ministers, and other European colleagues. Other senior U.S. officials reaffirmed our commitment in talks surrounding the UN last week as well. Ambassador Weston, our special coordinator, will return to the region in a few weeks. It also is my top priority.
The Annan Plan
-----------------
The way forward is clear. With the support of Greece and Turkey, the two sides should commit to negotiate the Annan Plan and put it to the two communities in parallel referenda within a specific time period. Changes to the plan can be made by mutual agreement through negotiations, but, given the history of UN negotiations, it is difficult to envisage wholesale revisions. There is an opportunity at hand, but there is also the very real danger that this opportunity will be missed. Time is running out. In short, the choice before us now is the Annan Plan or no solution.
The Annan Plan is not a “trap” sprung on one side by the other. The plan itself has a long pedigree in UN proposals. Many of its provisions were borrowed from earlier proposals. It includes ideas that have been supported by the leaders of one or both communities at various times. For example, under the Annan Plan, the Turkish Cypriot State would control slightly more than 29 percent of the island’s territory. This number was not pulled out of a hat. It was discussed extensively as far back as 1985, when the Turkish Cypriot side accepted it at a UN Summit. At the talks in 1992, the Turkish Cypriot side agreed to the eventual demilitarization of Cyprus, the desirability of a single sovereignty and single citizenship, and the importance of freedom of movement and settlement. All of these are reflected in the Annan Plan. The plan thus has deep roots in the history of Cyprus negotiations.
I repeat: the plan seeks to meet the essential, legitimate interests of both sides; it draws heavily on past proposals to do just that. Any workable plan for a Cyprus settlement will entail complex trade-offs. No party to a good agreement ever gets everything it wants.
The Annan Plan: Myths and Realities
----------------------------------------
One of the difficulties in evaluating a settlement based on the Annan plan is the considerable amount of misinformation – even disinformation – circulating about the plan itself. This is not an easy document to read. But since December’s vote is, as people say, a referendum on the Annan plan and EU membership, it is important that people have a clear understanding of the plan’s provisions.
Let me urge everyone to read at least the Secretary General’s April 1 report to the Security Council on his Good Offices mission in Cyprus. This report, which can be found on the UN website (www.un.org), includes a highly readable summary of his proposal and the plan’s implications. Our embassy website, www.americanembassy.org.cy, contains a link to this report and helpful links to various topics within the report. Some people attempt to reinterpret the plan in ways that fan fear and sow doubt. This UN document explains clearly what the Secretary General in his own words thinks his plan does to protect the rights of all on this island.
Let’s now explore briefly several of the most common misperceptions circulating about the Annan Plan. Before I start, a disclaimer: don’t just take my word for it. When you hear claims about what the Annan plan does or does not do, check them out with the United Nations, starting with the web site I mentioned.
One hears often, for example, that the Annan Plan does not take into account the realities of the island. This is the first view I want to address. An examination of the Annan plan does not support that view. On the contrary, the Plan explicitly enshrines the principle of bi-zonality, asserts the political equality of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, and declares the two constituent states of the United Cyprus Republic are of equal status. The plan is based on a partnership of equals.
The principle of bi-zonality is implemented and protected through numerous concrete safeguards. For example, the plan provides for a gradual approach to the establishment of residency by Greek Cypriots who return to the Turkish Cypriot State. For six years, there would be a total moratorium (with certain exceptions). After that, limitations could be imposed by the constituent states so that even after 15 years, new residencies could be limited if 21% of the population in any given village hailed from the other constituent state.
Misperception Number 2 is that the plan will enable the Greek Cypriot majority to dominate the Turkish Cypriot “minority” and erase Turkish Cypriots from the island. This too is incorrect. Let me clarify. The Annan Plan, on the contrary, includes multi-layered safeguards designed to protect -- not diminish -- the rights of Turkish Cypriots. Those safeguards include: the equal status of the two constituent states; the equal number of senators hailing from each constituent state; rotation of the chair of the Presidential Council among all its six members, which have to include two Turkish Cypriots. Let me say that more clearly: a Turkish Cypriot will be the leader of the Presidential Council at least one-third of the time; no decision can be taken at any level or in any federal organ without substantial support from both constituent states.
Look also at the distribution of responsibility within the governing structure. The federal government is empowered with the minimum authority necessary to ensure a coherent international personality and to function effectively as a member of the European Union. Virtually all matters important to individuals, those functions of government that most directly affect peoples’ lives -- such as education, health, direct taxation, industry, agriculture, transport, social security, the court system, and the police -- are vested in the constituent states. What does all that mean for your future? It means: under the Annan plan, Turkish Cypriots will continue to have control over their daily lives in their own region.
Moreover, political rights at the federal level are to be exercised on the basis of internal constituent state citizenship status. So Greek Cypriots who would live in the north -- a number which is expressly limited by the terms of the Plan -- would not necessarily become citizens of the Turkish Cypriot State and they would thus continue to vote in the Greek Cypriot State. In short, under the Annan plan, the Turkish Cypriot State would be the self-administered and political equal of the Greek Cypriot one, controlling its own political processes and territory.
A third argument claims that the Annan Plan would end the Turkish security guarantee. That’s not the case. The Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance will continue, not end. The scope of the Treaty of Guarantee, in fact, is enlarged to embrace the territorial integrity, security and constitutional order of the two constituent states. That is an important enhancement, not diminution of Turkey’s guarantee. The number of Turkish troops allowed under the Treaty of Alliance will increase from 650 to 6,000 until Turkey itself joins the EU. A similar increase, of course, applies to Greece. In addition, a UN force will remain on the island to assist the parties with implementation of the settlement and to prevent any misunderstanding or incidents in the early going. The UN mandate, however, does not in any way diminish the rights and obligations of the guarantor powers.
The Fourth Fear : one hears often that if the Annan Plan is adopted, half the population of the north will become refugees for the fourth time. That rhetoric grabs headlines, but it too is incorrect. The Secretary General’s report states otherwise. Under the plan, some people will have to move as a result of the return of some territory to the Greek Cypriot side. Not half, but some. But remember this: every feasible solution proposed during decades of UN talks, including even those supported in the past by the Turkish Cypriot side, has envisaged a territorial adjustment and thus relocation of some people. Promising no one will move is simply to promise there will be no solution ever.
The number of people who potentially will be affected by the Annan Plan, however, is far less than half of the population of the north. Go to the Secretary General’s April report and UN estimates, based on the 1996 census in the north. As many as 47,000 people, according to UN calculations, could need to relocate, not the 100,000 as some assert. However, only half of them would actually need to move to entirely different places. For the other half, those who live in Famagusta would likely move within their own town and those in Morphou/Guzelyurt to a suitable place nearby where they would still be able to make a living from their orange groves.
We understand that these numbers are of little comfort to those individuals who do have to move and do not have sufficient resources. Since much of the burden of a settlement will fall on their back, it is only appropriate that the plan, the federal government and the international community address their needs. That is why the international community has made clear that assistance will be made available to facilitate a settlement and ease the transition.
The costs of a settlement – although real – can be managed and international aid will help smooth the inevitable disruptions of change. As recently as the end of May during his visit to the island, the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development reiterated our commitment to participate in the donors’ conference the EU will organize and to contribute financially. Keep in mind as well the expected economic benefits that will accrue to all residents of the island following the adoption of the Annan Plan.
The Future
--------------
As lawyers, you have the training and experience necessary to read and understand the Annan Plan. I would argue, therefore, that you also have a special obligation to explain it to others. We have copies of the Secretary General’s report I mentioned earlier for you to take home. The antidote to fear based on inaccurate information is understanding based on accurate information. What makes the task more difficult is that neither side has done much to prepare the public at large to face the difficult compromises embodied in the Annan Plan or forgo a solution now all together.
Through negotiation and adoption of the Annan Plan, the Turkish Cypriot community would become part of the European family next May, with all of the advantages that family membership entails. Current obstacles to normal trade, foreign investment and international travel would be removed. A solution and membership in the EU would stimulate economic growth and give Turkish Cypriots access to all kinds of programs the EU has available to address economic disparities between regions. A solution would also help pave the way for Turkey’s eventual accession to the European Union, something the United States strongly supports.
Thank you for inviting me today. We are at a critical point in this island’s history. The Annan Plan is not perfect. No compromise ever is. We are convinced, however, that accepting the Annan plan would open up a brighter, more prosperous and more secure future for all of the inhabitants of Cyprus.
Future generations will look back on the decisions made in the weeks and months ahead. As you reflect upon what the Annan plan does to safeguard your rights, I suggest you ask yourself these two questions: What is in store for me and my family if we accept a solution based on the Annan Plan and join the European Union? What is in store for us if we lose this opportunity and remain outside Europe?
Neither can be answered with real certainty. Yes, the prospect of a better future offered by the Annan Plan involves uncertainties. But so does the absence of a solution have its costs and uncertainties as well. The region will not sit still; there is no certainty – no certainty at all – that things will get better, or even stay the same.
At the end of the day, I would urge you to trust in your best hopes rather than surrender to your worst fears, fears which some seek only to inflate. The United States does not want to see a return to the dark days before 1974; we are convinced that the Annan Plan provides enough safeguards for all people on the island to be able to trust in their hopes and enjoy the benefits of joining Europe. Thank you.
|
