Category: Europe

UN Secretary-General’s Special Adviser Espen Barth Eide

AS IT IS certain the UN Secretary-General’s Special Adviser Espen Barth Eide will not be arriving in Cyprus tomorrow for the Holy Week church services, we can deduce that his visit might have something to do with fixing a date for the resumption of the talks. All the causes of the interruption – the Turkish NAVTEX, the incursions of the Barbaros in the Cypriot EEZ, the exploratory drilling by ENI-KOGAS – no longer exist and neither side can stay away from the negotiations.

Turkish & Greek Cypriot Leaders Eroglu and Anastasiades

Only President Anastasiades seemed to be unaware of the reason for the visit. Asked on Wednesday whether Eide would announce a resumption of the talks, he responded negatively and playfully claimed not to know the reason for the visit. He conceded that the envoy would have consultations to establish whether conditions for the resumption of the talks had been created, but expressed doubts about the existence of these conditions.

As the Barbaros left Famagusta port on Monday and the NAVTEX expires tomorrow, both conditions set by Anastasiades for returning to the talks have been satisfied. Last Sunday, however, he appeared to have set a new condition, when he said: “Our participation in a procedure that would, in effect, accept the disputing of the national sovereignty of the Cyprus republic should be expected by nobody.”

He repeated a milder variation of this condition on Wednesday saying the “sovereign rights of the Cyprus Republic should not be disregarded.”

Was he being playful, setting new conditions in order to avoid going to the talks or was this just a rhetorical flourish? Then again, the president’s rhetorical flourishes have of late adopted the phraseology of those who are opposed to the talks and a settlement, although he has stopped short of endorsing their vacuous call for a new strategy. After attending the April 1 church service he again said he was waiting for the creation of the conditions for the resumption of negotiations and once these were created “there would certainly be the appropriate consultations with the political forces.”

But what need is there for consultations with political forces that are openly opposed to the resumption of the talks and have been expressing fears that the president was being pressured into returning to the talks as if this were a bad thing? In the last few days all parties, except AKEL and DISY, have bluntly told Anastasiades not to return to the talks or at least to set such conditions that would be certain to prevent their resumption.

On Friday, one newspaper, quoting unnamed government sources, said Anastasiades feared the possibility of Turkey sending the Barbaros into the Cypriot EEZ while talks were in progress, but neither the UN nor the US was prepared to give an assurance this would not happen.

The truth is Anastasiades would welcome a return of the Barbaros to the EEZ once talks have resumed because this would give him a legitimate reason to walk out. What he really fears is that this time the talks would not be allowed to drag on indefinitely and that Eide, who has the full support of the international community, is determined to achieve a result within the next few months.

This is why the idea of talks at a venue abroad, with the participation of Turkey and Greece, has been mentioned although there is no such plan at present.

Despite his alleged commitment to settlement, Anastasiades is terrified of the prospect of being locked into a negotiation process which would have no escape route until a deal is reached. He is also aware this could be the last chance for a settlement – a point repeatedly made by the Norwegian envoy – and that delaying tactics, to which he had resorted so far, would not be an option.

There might not be suffocating time-frames, but it is highly unlikely the process would be allowed to last much longer than a few months before an overall settlement is put on the table or, failing that, the UN winds up the whole process.

In short, once the talks begin there will be no turning back and big decisions, one way or the other, will have to be taken. Anastasiades is fully aware of this which is why he has been setting new conditions and looking for excuses not to return to the talks. Like his predecessors he appears unwilling to sacrifice his presidency for a settlement, which is not a good sign, even if Eide secures the president’s grudging agreement to the resumption of the talks.

CYPRUS MAIL

Anastasiades and Russian President Putin at their joint press conference

ALL THE SHORTCOMINGS of President Anastasiades as a politician and head of state were displayed during his heralded official visit to Russia. His failure to exercise restraint when speaking publicly, his inclination to allow his emotions to rule his head, his poor judgement and inadequate diplomatic skills, his obsession with his domestic popularity ratings and his inability to see any difference between speaking at a Sunday memorial service in a Cyprus village and in front of an international audience were all evident on his Russia trip.

The more he spoke – and he was given plenty of opportunities to do so – the more he showed himself up, oblivious to the harm he was causing himself and more importantly the country. Anastasiades went out of his way to cause offence to his EU partners whose policies towards Russia he openly criticised while absolving President Putin of any responsibility for the crisis in the Ukraine. Even if he believed that to be true there was no good reason for repeating it in public – worse still, on a visit to the country that has been behind the dispute – as it would not win him any friends in Brussels.

Anastasiades appeared to be on a mission to antagonise the EU and the US during this badly-timed visit. He boasted that he was the first leader of an EU member-state to visit the Russian Federation during “this critical period”, informing journalists the two countries supported each other on all issues, but primarily, on the Cyprus problem, the economy and the Ukraine crisis. He did not openly say whether his government supported the invasion and annexation of Crimea as the matter was not raised, but he felt the EU was wrong to impose sanctions on Russia “on the suspicion Russia encouraged the separatists”.

The Europeans had shown their double standards in this case he said because Russia had not invaded the eastern Ukraine whereas Turkey invaded Cyprus’ EEZ and the EU did not impose sanctions. This simplistic argument may have earned him applause back home – this is the audience he was targeting – but it was insensitive and foolish considering some 5,000 people have been killed and the separatists, using heavy weapons provided by Putin, have reduced eastern Ukraine to rubble forcing more than a million people to flee their homes.

Believing Russian involvement in the Ukraine crisis was just a figment of the imagination of EU leaders, Anastasiades took a stand, with some other countries, against tough sanctions being imposed by the EU. If he had not, sanctions would have been tougher he claimed. “Cyprus is the most trustworthy voice for Russia within the EU,” he declared in a joint news conference with Putin. Again, it seems rather unwise to advertise such a dubious role, even if it sounds good to your hosts. In effect Anastasiades was warning his EU partners and Brussels not to trust him because he was promoting Russia’s interests in the Union.

All these utterances went down very well in Cyprus where the anti-Western demagogues welcomed the supposed restoration of good relations with Moscow and hoped they would be strengthened. But apart from winning the plaudits of his fellow politicians in Cyprus, Anastasiades gained nothing meaningful or practical from his visit to Russia that would benefit Cyprus. Putin, despite his allegedly principled stand on international matters, did not even mention Turkey’s invasion of Cypriot EEZ, let alone issue a mild rebuke of the Turks; he would continue offering support on the Cyprus problem – it was reported – but this would be conditional on not upsetting Turkey.

There was one big negative to the theatre staged in Russia by Putin and in which Anastasiades took a starring role. He will now be regarded a Putin pawn, with ample justification, that none of his fellow-leaders in the EU would trust or take seriously. He paid an official visit at a time when the EU was supposedly united against the Russian role in the Ukraine crisis, giving Putin the opportunity to embarrass Brussels, at least publicity-wise. And worse still, he openly sided with Russia against the EU over the Ukraine when there was no need to do so.

All this, from a president, whose supposed foreign policy objective until a few months ago was to place Cyprus in the Western sphere of influence and try to join NATO. It is now clear that Anastasiades has no long-term goals and foreign policy is shaped by his whims and whatever he believes might improve his popularity rating.

 Küfi Seydali