United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with Cyprus President Demetris Christofias and Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu on Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010 at the United Nations headquarters in New York.
Please read the Full Text of the Secretary General's Report here:
Or if you prefer to just see the highlights, please see below where we publish a collection of short excerpts from the Report. They can be helpful for understanding the orientation of Mr. Ban Ki-moon and the UN Security Council toward the possibility of Peace and Justice in Cyprus.
Following that is a short Commentary identifying some of the Distortions, Omissions and Lies embedded in the Report.
The Secretary General's Report consists of 44 numbered paragraphs. The numbers in our text follow the Report so that the origin of each quote can be found easily within the Full Text version. We have rendered some of the text in bold for emphasis.
* * *
Pearls from the
Report of the Secretary-General on his mission of good offices in Cyprus
Pearls from the
Report of the Secretary-General on his mission of good offices in Cyprus
The current round of negotiations was initiated following the agreement ...between the Greek Cypriot leader, Mr. Demetris Christofias, and the Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr. Mehmet Ali Talat.
...The two leaders reaffirmed their commitment to a bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality, as defined by relevant Security Council resolutions. This partnership will have a Federal Government with a single international personality, as well as a Turkish Cypriot Constituent State and a Greek Cypriot Constituent State of equal status... In a joint statement, the leaders stated that they had “discussed the issues of single sovereignty and citizenship which they agreed in principle”.
A further joint statement was issued on 25 July 2008, which affirmed that: “The aim of the fullfledged negotiations is to find a mutually acceptable solution to the Cyprus problem which will safeguard the fundamental and legitimate rights and interests of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. The agreed solution will be put to separate simultaneous referenda”.
Basic differences exist between the two sides. The Greek Cypriots hold, as a matter of principle, that the Greek Cypriots with property in the north should be able to choose between exchange, compensation or reinstatement. This is unacceptable to the Turkish Cypriots who say that 70 to 80 per cent of the property in the north is owned by Greek Cypriots and if all Greek Cypriot property owners were to be allowed reinstatement it would be impossible for the Turkish Cypriots to secure bizonality. The Turkish Cypriots request a ceiling on the number of Greek Cypriots who can have their properties reinstated. For the Greek Cypriots this is unacceptable. For the time being these two positions are irreconcilable.
We must be clear that to negotiate successfully a bizonal, bicommunal federation, the two leaders will have to reconcile these and other seemingly irreconcilable issues across all six chapters. These include the issue of territory, as the Greek Cypriots have made it clear that it will be impossible for them to move forward without linking property discussions to the territory chapter.
On the Treaty of Guarantee, the Turkish Cypriots and Turkey insist that the Treaty remain while the Greek Cypriots want it terminated.
The process so far has been characterized by periods of sluggish activity together with some flashes on dynamism ahead of important events. It is my concern that the political environment in the second quarter of 2011 will likely not be conducive to constructive negotiations. Parliamentary elections in the south are scheduled for May, while elections will be held in Turkey in June.
The near-total official secrecy of the negotiations, based on the principle of “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”, while understandable from the practical standpoint, has also not been helpful on the public front. This tension between confidentiality and transparency has no easy solution in peace processes. Unfortunately, the only detailed information that the public has been given of the negotiations is as a result of selective leaking of texts through media. Not surprisingly, polls show the public in general would like to be better informed about what is happening in the talks and able to have more input into the process.
I have been very disappointed to see a steady stream of untruthful and highly negative remarks about the United Nations reflected in the media. This criticism and misinformation about the UN is most unfortunate. Efforts by opponents of a solution to undermine the UN's credibility directly undermines the process itself.
The international community has remained engaged in the Cyprus peace process due to the critical importance of its resolution for the island as well as the region and there is a clear expectation that it will succeed.
While some progress has been made, it has been frustratingly slow. When I visited the island in February, I urged the leaders of the two communities not to waste this historic opportunity. International expectations were high that the leaders of Cyprus would rise to the challenge, and that a solution was within reach. It is disappointing that, as we approach the end of the year, those expectations have not been met.
Now is the moment to dedicate all efforts to bring these negotiations to a successful conclusion. Having stated their commitment to the shared goals of a bizonal, bicommunal federation, the leaders of Cyprus are expected to make good on their commitment to that outcome.
Special Adviser Downer and his team have been working hard to be as helpful to this process as possible, and they have my full support. The United Nations will remain intensively engaged during this upcoming phase in the process. However, the destiny of Cyprus is largely in the hands of the leaders of both communities.
The active participation and engagement of civil society in the effort to reach a solution and its implementation is also a crucial aspect of the negotiations. Now, more than ever, as public support is flagging, civil society can play an important role in supporting the leaders and the process."
* * *
Distortions, Omissions and Lies embedded in the Report
Distortions, Omissions and Lies embedded in the Report
In the Report, there is not a single mention of Turkey as an occupation force on the island. The words "military" and "occupation" are entirely missing. Nor is there any mention of the fact that the invasion, occupation, ethnic cleansing, genocide and continued occupation of Cyprus is made possible only through military weapons and training from the United States of America.
Also not mentioned is that the United Kingdom is a power illegally occupying a part of Cyprus with military forces.
Given the fact that the United States, as the military power enabling the occupation of Cyprus, and the United Kingdom, a military power occupying a part of Cyprus, are both Permanent Members of the UN Security Council and leading forces within it, and that Turkey, the force illegally occupying all of the north of Cyprus is also currently a member of the UN Security Council, what validity or legality is there in the "relevant Security Council resolutions" quoted by Ban Ki-moon?
The problem in Cyprus is presented in the Report as if it is a "difference of opinion" between the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriot leaders, or as a conflict between the two communities, whereas in reality the two communities have no real conflicts of interest between us.
Removal of the military occupation forces is not mentioned. At all. Nor is there any recognition of the fact that any solution, no matter what its final form, is crucially dependent on the withdrawal of the occupation forces. The solution is presented as something that will supposedly come from the agreement of the two community leaders, even though the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community does not have the power to order a withdrawal of the occupation troops back to Turkey. In other words, the basic premise of the negotiations, and the Report on them, is a complete fraud.
There is no mention of the two most crucial UN Security Council Resolutions of July 1974 and August 1974 calling for "the withdrawal without delay from the Republic of Cyprus of foreign military personnel present otherwise than under the authority of international agreements":
There is no mention of the occupation regime as an illegal state, nor of the illegal status of the Turkish Cypriot representative who calls himself a "Head of State" in defiance of the resolution issued by the UN Security Council itself in 1985 condemning the separatist unilateral "declaration of independence" that was announced by the occupation regime that was illegally installed through force or arms by Turkey's military.
In the Report, the part of Cyprus that remains unoccupied and legally constituted as a State by all international laws and agreements is referred to as "the south". This is a direct insult thrown in the face of the President of the Republic of Cyprus, and a clear effort to downgrade and denigrate the Republic of Cyprus. President Christofias is either incapable of understanding this, or entirely uncaring about it. This is an injury to both the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot communities who are all legally Citizens of the Republic and, as legally recognized European Union citizens are represented in the EU and at the United Nations by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus.
There is no mention of the fact that the "Bizonal Solution" for Cyprus that is being forged by the occupation forces in concert with the global powers through the "good offices" of the UN Secretary General and with the collaboration of local politicians is a system of racist Apartheid, modelled after South Africa's Apartheid system. It is replete with Race Laws that will cover everything from the geographical distribution of the people into two Zones according to Race (ethnicity, religion, language), all the way to property rights; education; employment in civil service; electoral rights and demographic quotas.
Ban Ki-moon recognizes that there is opposition to this racist plan. Antiracist activists recognize that if the Bizonal partition of Cyprus is effected and Apartheid becomes officially instituted, this particular form of inequality and injustice will be a guarantee for eternal war in and around Cyprus. But in the Report, the racist Bizonal arrangement is presented in an idealised form, concealing its true political nature. While those who work for a solution that can guarantee lasting Peace and Justice by demanding first and foremost a withdrawal of the occupation armies, are labelled as "opponents of a solution". Is it just a clever manipulation, or deliberate maliciousness?
A Few More Notes
Throughout the Report, there are references manifesting a recognition that antiracist and anti-imperialist forces in Cyprus oppose the Bizonal plan. This is highlighted in the Secretary General's choice of words: at one point he says "Now, more than ever, as public support is flagging..."
At other points he seems to be scolding the two community leaders for not having done enough to bend and neutralize opposition to the Bizonal Apartheid plan. He tells them that the global powers - which he calls the "international community " - have expectations, he calls on the two leaders to "rise to the challenge" because "those expectations have not been met." He tells them that "the leaders of Cyprus are expected to make good on their commitment to that outcome." In other words, the demand to satisfy the global powers is more important than welfare, peace and justice for the people of Cyprus. If the people complain about the injustices built into the Bizonal Apartheid plan, it's the leaders' task to neutralize those complaints. Ban Ki-moon says that "it is incumbent on the leaders to reverse the cycle of negative messaging."
And he proceeds to tell them to not assume that "public opinion will be easily pulled along", but that they need to do certain things to achieve that. One of them is to realize that "civil society can play an important role in supporting the leaders and the process."
And what does this mean? He is suggesting more clever manipulations in order to deceive the public into accepting this racist solution. He provides the necessary elements of the choreography that will lead to public acceptance. One of them, as we saw above, is to label antiracist opponents of the Bizonal plan as "opponents of a solution". Another suggestion is that "parliamentarians and political actors on both sides should more consistently demonstrate their support for the negotiation process". And the best suggestion is to play the gender card! Here is how he phrased it - the full text of paragraph 43:
"The active participation and engagement of civil society in the effort to reach a solution and its implementation is also a crucial aspect of the negotiations. Now, more than ever, as public support is flagging, civil society can play an important role in supporting the leaders and the process. In addition, mindful of the important role of women in peace negotiations, as recognized in Security Council resolution 1325, I would encourage the sides to continue their engagement with the Gender Advisory Team, consisting of civil society activists and scholars from across the island, and to seriously consider its gender-focused recommendations on the main areas under discussion in the peace talks."Just like every other advertising campaign: if the product is failing, you have to use women to promote it. Women, the image of women, and the illusion that "local women scholars" and "civil society women activists" are involved in forging the Bicommunal solution will make it more attractive. And the involvement of women will create the impression that some sort of feminine sense of justice is built into the process.
And to this idea all we can say is that it is the most disgusting inversion, perversion and degradation of Feminism.
It's bad enough that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon wants to promote a racist Bizonal form of Apartheid on our island as a "final solution" to the Cyprus problem in order to better serve the Imperialist powers who are his patrons and supporters. It's also despicable that President Christofias and Mehmet Ali Talat pretended to provide a "socialist" marketing and "leftist" packaging of the racist plan in order to make it acceptable to the people. But to sink as low as to concoct a perverted illusion of "Feminist support" for Apartheid?
Shame on you Mr. Ki-moon.
Petros Evdokas, email@example.com
Collective or Individual Signatures?
Is "Ki-moon" a greek word?
"Kimono, kimono, kimono. Ha! Of course! Kimono is come from the Greek word himona, is mean winter..."
Alexander Downer on the Global Scene
Radical and Mainstream Press: a Convergence?