The option of no solution is the worst and most disastrous choice for the Republic of Cyprus
Let’s look at the basics: if talks ever resume, they will be based on the so-called “acquis” of the process, which are as follows:
- Talks take place between the two constitutionally enshrined communities of the Republic of Cyprus.
- If things move forward, the three guarantor powers will also participate on security issues. This is a tremendous success for us, since such a five-party mechanism (within the EU) seals the continuation of the legitimate Republic of Cyprus established in 1960.
- The final solution will concern the Republic of Cyprus, a member of the EU and the UN.
- Following the solution, the European acquis and the Charter of Human Rights will be applied throughout the island. These outcomes were agreed upon in Crans-Montana.
- After the solution, Turkey will be merely a third country with bilateral relations with an EU member state—just as with all the others. There is no other formula.
Under these circumstances, it is incomprehensible why there should be even a single Greek Cypriot who does not want a solution and chooses to continue the occupation, with all its disastrous consequences —which is the only other available option.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
Of course, the question has a very simple answer if we acknowledge that the most serious issue on the Greek Cypriot side is the one that has existed since 1960: the belief that Cyprus belongs solely to our community and our refusal to accept power-sharing. This is what created the Cyprus problem, and this is what keeps it unsolved. This is what gives rise to all the excuses and blatant lies told by those who oppose a solution.
Officially, no one admits—of course—to this, because it is not proper and because—furthermore—it is inconsistent with the legitimate 1960 Constitution, which provides for inflexible arrangements regarding the structure of power.
Provisions based on ethnic criteria, which are outdated and now legally prohibited in the EU. The hypocrisy of those who reject the DDO by invoking a host of lies— including racism, among other things, while they happily accept the Republic of Cyprus under the archaic 1960 constitution.
One might reasonably ask: well, why did the EU accept the accession of the Republic of Cyprus with its problem unresolved, and with a constitution that is problematic (by European standards)?
The answer is simple and eminently political: the EU believed that the situation as it stood upon the country’s accession in 2004 was temporary and that any flaws in the constitution would be rectified after a solution was reached. A solution and peace in the region were priorities.
It is no coincidence, after all, that as early as the Annan Plan—and with an eye toward EU accession— references to a Greek Cypriot and a Turkish Cypriot “state” were “omitted,” and a reference to two “constituent states” was introduced—in accordance with the European acquis.
You see, a normal, legitimate Republic of Cyprus within the EU could never elect a president based on his or her origin (unacceptable within the EU), but rather on the basis of the constituent state from which he or she would come (acceptable within the EU).
Accession took place in 2004. Twenty-two years later, we are as far from a solution as possible, yet we do not even understand the risks involved. The obvious divergence of our Constitution from European standards is not only bad for us, to the extent that we wish to call ourselves European citizens. This divergence also poses a danger. If efforts to find a solution collapse definitively and the political justification of “let’s put them in, turn a blind eye until they figure it out” is eliminated, then some may raise more fundamental questions: Can a country with such obvious “flaws” in its constitution be a member of the EU?
And then we’ll realize that our hands are tied even if we want to fix what’s wrong: because amending the 1960 constitution can be done legally ONLY with the participation of both communities,
The other option: to abolish ourselves and proclaim the new (half) Greek Cypriot Republic with a constitution that is in line with the European acquis.
You realize that these are neither jokes nor easy solutions. They are, however, proof that the option of no solution is the worst and most disastrous choice for the Republic of Cyprus.
Strovoliotis | But is it really possible that you want another timetable?
