Note: the following article by the world-known composer and a leading figure of the Greek left and of the resistance against the military junta of the colonels, Mikis Theodorakis was published in the Greek daily Kathimerini in May 2, 2004, some days after the referendum of April 25, by which the Cypriots overwhelmingly rejected the Annan plan for the solution of the Cyprus conflict, ignoring the enormous pressures exercised on them by the US administration, the EU and large parts of the Greek and the Cypriot political, economic and media elites.
Ten days ago, in a statement, I called on the Cypriot citizens to respond with a resounding “no” to the ultimatums of (US President) George Bush and (Foreign Secretary) Colin Powell. Today, I decided to speak again about the importance of this “no”, and to highlight some elements of the Annan Plan, which was attempted and will be attempted again to pass, on the occasion is the publication of the book “The Abduction of Cyprus” (Livani Editions) by journalist Dimitris Konstantakopoulos. A book that deeply shocked me and that all Greeks should read.
A week ago, the Greek Cypriots said their big “no,” rejecting, with a staggering 76%, the Annan Plan. The ordinary Cypriot citizens found the courage to ignore American ultimatums and pressures. They refused to succumb to political leaders and media, to the new “American party,” which tried to make its own fear and subservience the fear and subservience of Cypriots and Greeks. With their vote, they safeguarded their independent and democratic state, the state of Greeks and Turks of Cyprus, the Republic of Cyprus.
They still defend it.
If the forces (not the citizens, of course) that supported the “yes” were sincere, they should, after the result, sit down and think about what went wrong in their own policy, how they ended up defending with fanaticism a plan rejected by such an overwhelming majority of the population. Instead, from the moment the results were announced, we see them parading on television as if nothing happened, explaining to us that it is not they who are sailing wrong, but the shore that is crooked. Some even openly aligned themselves with Washington’s pursuit to overthrow President (of Cyprus) Papadopoulos. Leaders of political parties in Cyprus and Euro MPs from Greece took the lead in exerting pressure on Nicosia in international forums. They accuse the Cypriot people of not wanting a solution, or of being “swept away” in exercising their supreme democratic right. And in a display of national irresponsibility, to say the least, they undermine the solidarity of Greeks in Greece and Greeks in Cyprus, a solidarity that, when shaken in our history, resulted in nothing but bloody tragedies.
Before the referendum, they said they should support whatever decision the sovereign Cypriot people made. After the referendum, they support it like the rope supports the hanged! Instead of telling their friends, Bush, (British PM) Blair, (NATO Secretary General) Solana, and (EU Commissioner) Verheugen, to respect the popular verdict, they offer, in deeds and words, abundant so-called “arguments” to the enemies of Cyprus, to those who want to present not the Turkish invasion and occupation army, not the unacceptable Annan Plan and the machinations of the Anglo-Americans, but the majority of Cypriots who rejected it, as responsible for “not solving the Cyprus problem”! In an incredible distortion of reality, they claim that the Cypriot citizen who said “no” to the dissolution of the Republic of Cyprus did so supposedly because they do not want to see their homeland free and united, because they do not want to see Famagusta, Kyrenia, and Morphou free again! They forget that even the refugees from Famagusta, the most certain that they would immediately get their properties back, also voted “no”.
What does the Annan Plan provide?
The question in the referendum was not “do you want or not a solution to the Cyprus problem ?” but “do you want or not the Annan Plan?” But what does this plan provide? Is it perhaps some kind of solution, even if unjust, even if painful, even if unbalanced? My conclusion from studying the plan (and this is also the contribution of Dimitris Konstantakopoulos’ book) is exactly this: the plan not only imposes an unacceptable solution but is also a very dangerous recipe, risking to involve Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, Greece and Turkey, in a very bad way. It is not at all coincidental that the Annan Plan is promoted mainly by the USA and Britain, the two powers that have caused the current bloodshed in the Middle East, after previously leading the peoples of the Balkans to instability and tragedy with their interventions.
Here are some of the unprecedented, unheard-of in international practice, and contrary to all modern political culture, the Enlightenment, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the UN Charter provisions of the plan:
– The majority becomes a minority.
What will the new state deal with for many years? With the relations of the two communities, of course. Who will make the relevant decisions? Cypriot citizenship will be granted by the Citizenship Council where Greek Cypriots are a minority, although they are the majority of the population. The residence permit for Greek and Turkish nationals in Cyprus will be issued by the Foreigners Council (where Greek Cypriots are a minority). The borders of the two states will be determined by the Border Commission (where Greek Cypriots are a minority). The return of refugees will be handled by the Resettlement Council (with only one Greek Cypriot out of five members). Property claims and compensation issues will be dealt with by the Property Council (where Greek Cypriots are a minority).
Who will determine the monetary policy of the new “state”? The Central Bank, in whose administration Greek Cypriots will be a minority.
Who will ultimately judge all the decisions of all the organs of the new state? The Supreme Court, where Greek Cypriot judges will be a minority.
In all these institutions, which will make the critical decisions, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots are represented with an equal number of members. In case of disagreement, the final decision will be taken by foreigners appointed by Annan. And as we all know, (UN Secretary General) Kofi Annan is not even the Security Council, he is the man Washington imposed as head of the UN. In other words, the Annan Plan does not solve any of the major problems in the relations of the two communities. It refers them all to the arbitration of Washington and London, the two powers that created the problem and whose impartiality we see highlighted these days.
Is there an honest and at the same time intelligent person who would call such a state a “United Cyprus Republic”?
– The state is governed by (foreign) judges.
Cyprus becomes the first “state” in the world to be governed by a Supreme Court with the authority to replace the Parliament and the Government, according to Article 6 of the Constitution. It will be able, for example, to vote on the budget, to vote in the EU, or to appoint ambassadors. It will also have the right to prohibit Cypriot citizens from residing in one of the two “constituent states” of their country! In its composition, Greek Cypriots will be a minority, and its members will likely elect their successors!
– What do specialists in constitutional law say?
The Annan Plan is a “constitutional monstrosity” and “comes in complete opposition to the fundamental principles of respect for human dignity and the protection of human rights and democracy” argues the president of the Union of Greek Constitutional Law Jurists and member of the Executive Committee of the International Association of Constitutional Law, Kostas Mavrias, and the director of the Institute of Constitutional Research at the University of Athens, Georgios Kasimatis (announcement, 23.4.04). Professor of Constitutional Law Dimitris Tsatsos has characterized the Annan Plan as “a text of a madman” that “no federation could ever discuss,” (Cypriot press, 21.3.04). Professor of Constitutional Law Vaggelis Venizelos characterized the Annan plan as “a monster,” which “can be torn apart in two minutes from a legal point of view,” (Antenna TV, 29.3.04)! The same point of view was defended by leading German specialists in Constitutional Law and the judge at the European Court Loukas Loukaidis.
– Federation or confederation the new state?
Neither a federation, nor a confederation, nor even a state. In which other state does not exist a “hierarchy” of federal and confederal laws, as explicitly provided for by the Annan Plan?
– In Cyprus, self-defense and the European army are prohibited…
Cyprus under Annan becomes the first UN state that is permanently prohibited from having an army. Such a measure did not even apply to Germany and Japan after World War II, nor to Saddam’s Iraq. Cyprus is also excluded from any current or future activity of the Euro army, without the consent of Ankara.
– …But a bunch of foreign armies are stationed on its soil.
While Cyprus is disarmed and the Euro army is prohibited, the presence of Turkish and British forces on its soil is provided for, with expanded rights of military intervention. If Turkey and Britain exclude the use of intervention rights, why do they insist on maintaining them?
– A new and worse “Zurich”
These security arrangements follow the philosophy and are even worse than those provided for by the Zurich and London agreements. But we have tested the provisions of Zurich and London. They allowed and facilitated bloody intercommunal riots, a coup, invasion, and partition. Do we want to start the work from the beginning?
– A state without mechanisms to enforce the agreement.
Even this otherwise unacceptable Annan Plan does not provide any effective means of enforcement. The return of territories and refugees, the observance of laws and international treaties, is left to the goodwill of the Turkish army, the Turkish police, and the governments of the USA and Britain! In this supposed common “state,” there will be borders and two police forces, one Greek and one Turkish. There will be a UN force (which we know from Yugoslavia, Iraq, Palestine, Cyprus itself, and countless other examples how “effective” it is), which will not, however, have a mandate to enforce the observance of the agreed terms, but only to monitor them.
Where did the monster come from?
Kofi Annan would never have presented this abomination if there were not politicians in Greece and Cyprus who -following Washington’s instructions- would allow him to do so. I leave it to others to try to interpret what (EU Commissioner) Verheugen meant when he said that in 1999, the then leaders of Greece and Cyprus promised him other things. Let them answer. I remind you that in January 2000, the advisor to the Greek Prime Minister, Giorgos Pantayas, before even the (Turkish Cypriot leader) Denktash-(Cypriot President) Clerides negotiations began, which led to the appearance of the Annan Plan, in an article supported the idea that the legal status of the Republic of Cyprus is of secondary importance, a position that deprived the negotiation of its significance and instead of leading to some “compromise,” ultimately led to complete capitulation, to the surrender of the Greek side in the negotiations. (President of the Republic of Cyprus) Glafkos Clerides insisted until then that the negotiations should be conducted within the UN resolutions, but later accepted to discuss with the “everything on the table” procedure.
Clerides, (Greek PM) Simitis, and (Greek FM) Papandreou convinced, with their stance and statements, that they were ready to accept everything, with the result that Washington, London, and Brussels told their successors (the ND government elected in March 2004) that they must honor their commitments! Washington, in collaboration with the Simitis-Papandreou government, pressured for the acceptance of the New York agreement (the mandatory arbitration of Annan), to make it difficult even for the next government of Athens and (President of Cyprus and Clerides’ successor ) Mr. Papadopoulos to possibly say no. And after they did all this, they asked the Cypriot (and Greek) people to agree to the dissolution of the Republic of Cyprus, succumbing to the pressures they themselves contributed to exert, so as not to upset Washington, London, and Verheugen. Fortunately, the citizens of Cyprus (and Greece) ultimately proved to have both brains and soul.
For a true reconciliation
All my life I have worked for the authentic, genuine, and sincere reconciliation of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, of the Greek and Turkish people. I have decisively condemned our own “tough guys,” who act smart when in a position of power and then run to bow to the powerful of the Earth, even when they are not asked to.
Such a reconciliation, however, can only be based on sincerity and justice. It cannot be done by dissolving the Republic of Cyprus. Greek Cypriots also have their share of responsibility for what happened in the past and must be very generous to their fellow citizens. But they should not be at all generous to Washington, to London, to the generals of Ankara, to those who are trying to pass a solution that is not a solution, but the recipe for perpetuating the hatred and conflict between Greeks and Turks, the means that the American “new Rome” uses to control Cyprus, Greece, and Turkey, as it has done so many times in the past.
The “no” of the Greek Cypriots to the dissolution of the Republic of Cyprus, but also the “yes” of the Turkish Cypriots, yes to democracy and Europe (because that is how it should be interpreted), create, in combination with the accession of Cyprus to the EU, a new situation, a new, unique historical opportunity. I call on Greeks and Turks of Cyprus, who know well how much I have been interested in their fate and progress, to turn their backs on the Annan framework, to crush in practice the green lines. They themselves must do this, not to trust again international arbitration processes that gave birth to a monster and will give birth to it again if we allow them to. They themselves, those who will live in their common state, must find the solution, not to trust the State Department and the Foreign Office, the Annans, de Sotos (as was named the special representative of UN for Cyprus), Solanas, and their ilk.
The rest of us must respect both the “no” of the Greek Cypriots and the “yes” of the Turkish Cypriots – let them be undistracted to find themselves a solution that will allow all the citizens of Cyprus to feel free and prosper in the common democratic homeland that History and Europe owe them.
Translated by Christian Haccuria from https://www.kathimerini.gr/politics/182886/giati-xanaleme-ochi-sto-schedio-anan/
Also read
The Divisions of Cyprus
USAID in Cyprus: Greek MEPs requesting information about funds and Annan Plan
We remind our readers that publication of articles on our site does not mean that we agree with what is written. Our policy is to publish anything which we consider of interest, so as to assist our readers in forming their opinions. Sometimes we even publish articles with which we totally disagree, since we believe it is important for our readers to be informed on as wide a spectrum of views as possible.
