EP - The outlook for Cyprus after the failure of the referendum

With four days to go before enlargement of the EU, MEPs discussed on Tuesday the reasons for the failure of the referendum on the reunification of Cyprus. Greek and Turkish Cypriots were both asked to vote last Saturday on the peace plan proposed by the United Nations but, while around 65% of Turkish Cypriots backed the plan which would have led to reunification, 75% of Greek Cypriots voted against. As a result, on 1 May only the (Greek) Republic of Cyprus will join the EU. "We at the European Parliament greatly regret the decision taken through this referendum. The proposal put forward to settle the conflict did not receive sufficient consent from the Greek Cypriot population" said Elmar BROK (EPP-ED, D) at today's meeting of the EP Foreign Affairs Committee, of which he is chairman. He added that the Council, which had recommended providing economic aid of €259 million to the northern part of the island in the event of reunification, was still prepared to provide this funding, even after the failure of the referendum of 24 April.

Enlargement Commissioner Günter VERHEUGEN pointed out that in 1997, when the accession negotiations started, the Commission had invited the Turkish Cypriots to take part in the negotiations. "They rejected our proposal", he explained. Turning to the referendum he said that "if the Greek Cypriot government had publicly supported it, the Yes vote would have won." The Commissioner regretted that it had not been possible for him to take part in the information campaign for the population of Cyprus. "The main reason for the failure is the lack of trust and fear among the Greek Cypriots". Lastly, he said, it was the Union's duty to "continue doing everything for reunification of the island, to maintain cohesion between the two communities and not to punish the Turkish Cypriots".

According to Greek Cypriot MP Nicos CLEANTHOUS, the co-chairman of the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee, "the Greek Cypriots are the first victims. Why does Turkey, a country which is a candidate for membership of the Union, have a right of military intervention?" he asked. "The past clearly shows that when promises are not kept, agreements are not kept either". According to George VASSILIOU, who negotiated Cyprus' accession to the EU, "the biggest problem for the Greek Cypriots is still security". In order to make progress a situation must be reached in which "the majority of Greek Cypriots feel they have security".

Mehmet Ali TALAT, leader of the Turkish Republican Party, voiced "deep sorrow" at the results of the referendum, while underlining the high percentage of "Yes" votes on the Turkish side. "The Turkish Cypriots are ready for political, judicial and economic harmonisation in line with the acquis communautaire", he said. "I appeal for the economic, social and political embargo to be lifted by 1 May. But lifting the embargo must not be seen as a substitute for a solution" he explained.

Several MEPs spoke in the subsequent debate. "The No vote by the Greek side is due to a feeling of insecurity. But accession to the European Union by a reunified island would have brought better guarantees of security", said Mechtild ROTHE (PES, D). "What is the alternative to the Annan plan?" asked Jacques POOS (PES, L). "The advocates of a No vote must tell us", he said, adding "there is no other solution than to hold a second referendum".

According to Konstantinos ALYSSANDRAKIS (EUL/NGL, GR) "the Greek Cypriots have rejected a rushed solution". Moreover, "the Turkish Cypriots said Yes to free themselves from Turkish oppression!" he exclaimed. Regarding aid to the northern part of the island, he thought that "the only way to manage this aid would be to work through the Greek Cypriot government". Lastly, he asked in what capacity the Turkish Cypriot, Mr Talat, had been invited to take part in the discussion. "As the European Parliament, we are not bound by diplomatic constraints. We wish to hear the views of all parties in order to understand the situation better", answered Elmar BROK (EPP-ED, D).

Andrew DUFF (ELDR, UK) voiced disapproval at the "reactionary and nationalist" statements of Mr. Cleanthous. He then asked Commissioner Verheugen if the Copenhagen political criteria had been met by the Republic of Cyprus. "I do not have enough information to make such verifications", replied Mr Verheugen. "We must now work in close cooperation with the two communities", he added, underlining that "cooperation with the Turkish community does not entail diplomatic recognition". As regards the presence of Turkish troops on the island, Mr. Verheugen repeated that "the UN plan called for a withdrawal of the troops. Without this plan there will probably be more troops!" .

Elmar BROK argued that Europe had failed to reassure the Greek Cypriot population. "We did not explain sufficiently well that the Union would guarantee security". Lastly, Mehmet Ali TALAT stated that the Turkish Cypriots today were not responsible for "the continuing division of the island", even if the "events of 1963 and 1974 constitute the reason for the division". In his view, the arguments about security were a "pretext" for the Greek Cypriot government, "which was having to face the reality of a settlement for the first time".

27.04.2004 Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy
In the chair: Elmar BROK (EPP-ED, D)

| Top |

• Cyprus - Accession - Council adopts Regulation on the 'green line'  (4/5/2004)
• The New European Union of 25 (6/5/2003)