Réunification de Chypre: Les négociations en cours

Comaguer a consacré son dossier mensuel de Février 2017 sur Radio Galère à la question pendante depuis 1974 de la réunification de Chypre. Notre propos était de donner à cette question sa profondeur historique puisque la République de Chypre indépendante depuis 1960, membre de L’Union Européenne depuis 2004 et de l’eurogroupe depuis 2008 et seul Etat reconnu internationalement n’est souveraine que sur une fraction de son territoire : une république turque de Chypre Nord non reconnue  a été installée par l’armée turque sur 37% de la superficie du territoire , 30000 soldats de l’armée turque y stationnent et le gouvernement d’Ankara la tient à bout de bras financièrement mais s’acharne à faire croire qu’il ne s’agit pas d’une occupation. D’autre part dans la corbeille de l’indépendance le colonisateur britannique a laissé un cadeau empoisonné : il a conservé 150 km2 de territoire sous sa bannière pour y installer deux énormes bases militaires, puissant dispositif de surveillance et d’intervention dans la Méditerranée orientale.

Mais ni l’ONU, ni l’Union Européenne ne veulent brusquer la Turquie, poids lourd régional, membre de l’OTAN depuis 1952 et encore moins chasser l’armée britannique de sa colonie qui assure sur place une forte présence de l’OTAN dont la République de Chypre s’entête à ne pas vouloir faire partie.

Une première tentative de réunification avait été conduite en 2004 sous la forme du Plan Annan mais celui-ci avait été repoussé par référendum par la population chypriote, la majorité des habitants de la zone turque (environ 200 000 habitants)  y étant favorable mais la grande majorité des habitants de la République de Chypre (800 000 habitants) au sud y étant hostile.

Les négociations avaient été relancées en 2014. En effet, la « communauté internationale » avait pensé que l’élection en 2013 à la tête de la République de Chypre d’un  président conservateur  M. Anastasiades plus souple que son prédécesseur le communiste Christofias qui lui voulait voir l’ancienne puissance coloniale quitter complètement Chypre permettrait de rouvrir la négociation.

Las, l’annonce de la découverte de gisements de pétrole sous- marin dans les eaux de la ZEE chypriote avait suscité une violente réaction de la Turquie qui  par le truchement de sa « république  chypriote » voulait partager ce nouveau gâteau très prometteur et fidèle à ses méthodes favorites le président Erdogan allait jusqu’à annoncer que la Turquie s’imposerait militairement sur les nouvelles installations pétrolières en mer. La bonne volonté du nouveau président chypriote en souffrit et il alla même chercher un soutien militaire auprès de la seule puissance militaire régionale susceptible d’impressionner la Turquie : Israël, qui est lui-même en train d’organiser la protection des exploitations pétrolières sous marines qui s’ouvrent dans ses propres eaux territoriales.

Pour débloquer la négociation il fallait une donnée nouvelle. Elle survint avec l’élection en 2015 à la tête de la république turque de Chypre de M. Akinci un social-démocrate qui venait tout à point remplacer son prédécesseur conservateur plus rigide M. Erolu. La négociation reprit donc en 2016 sous les auspices de l’ONU accompagnée dans sa démarche par  l’union européenne et par les 3 tuteurs de la République de Chypre. Celle-ci en effet n’est pas complément indépendante puisque le Traité de Garantie qui a scellé son indépendance donne jusqu’à nouvel ordre à la Grande-Bretagne, à la Grèce et à la Turquie censés garantir en 1960 la  toute nouvelle souveraineté de Chypre un droit de regard permanent sur ses relations internationales.

Elle vient à nouveau de capoter car la République de Chypre a posé une condition à sa poursuite : le retrait de l’armée turque. Comme on pouvait s’y attendre le Président Erdogan a rejeté  vigoureusement cette demande. Pour faire bonne figure les diplomates internationaux en charge du dossier ont annoncé la poursuite de négociations techniques , celles concernant par exemple la restitution des biens des chypriotes grecs chassés de chez eux les mains vides par l’armée turque en 1974 et qui ont souvent été remplacés dans leurs terres ou dans leurs maisons non pas par des chypriotes turcs mais par des colons turcs venus d’Anatolie.

Mais au-delà du problème du départ des armées étrangères  le fond  de la question est celui de l’unité de la République et de la future constitution chypriote.

La réunification pour être durable et démocratique doit sortir du cadre tracé par le colonisateur britannique : celui du double communautarisme. Toute structure fédérale : deux Etats  celui des chypriotes grecs et celui des chypriotes turcs séparés territorialement  en éternisant la ligne de partage fixée par l’armée turque, inégaux en taille, à des niveaux de développement inégaux (la république turque du nord est beaucoup plus pauvre ) n’aurait aucune stabilité dans le long terme et évoluerait inévitablement vers un confédéralisme de façade  qui officialiserait l’annexion du nord de l’ile par la Turquie et la ferait rentrer par la fenêtre dans une Union Européenne dont la porte ne lui est pas vraiment ouverte.

La crise actuelle de l’Etat turc, les incertitudes sur son orientation géostratégique  future et les changements dans les équilibres géopolitiques régionaux (fin la crise syrienne, renforcement du poids de l’Iran, nouveau positionnement de l’Egypte,  présence russe réaffirmée) rendent la question de la réunification  très dépendante d’un contexte en transformation.

Nous joignons à ce bulletin la version anglaise  – mais entre eux ils se parlent grec – d’un échange de correspondance public entre AKEL parti du travail (communiste) chypriote, seconde force politique de la République de Chypre et le Parti Communiste grec (KKE), ce dernier qui a été reçu à ce sujet par Alexis Tsipras, recommandant la fermeté sur les objectifs principaux : départ de toutes les troupes étrangères et unité démocratique dans une république unie et dans le respect des croyances de chacun.

 

************************************************************************

The first letter of the PB of the CC of the KKE to the CC of AKEL on 19/10/2016 « To the CC of AKEL »

IN RELATION TO THE DEVELOPMENTS ON THE CYPRUS ISSUE AND THE POSITION OF THE KKE

Comrades,

In the framework of the longstanding comradely relations of our parties over the course of decades and the always sincere position of the KKE, we address this letter to you so that we can inform you about the positions of the CC of the KKE regarding the developments around the Cyprus issue, in light of the new facts, and so that you are the first to know of our views.

We will then inform the other political forces of Cyprus, with the exception of the fascists.

Comrades,

First of all, we assess that the problem, unsolved for 42 years, of invasion-occupation has today passed into a new phase of intensification, due to the imperialist military operations in the region and the inter-imperialist contradictions around the oil and natural gas pipelines, the transport routes for commodities etc. Both Greece and Turkey, as well as Cyprus all have bases installed, i.e. they have provided territory for US-NATO bases and British military bases, which also today play an increased role in the region, in the imperialist military operations.

The developments are very dangerous. The antagonisms are sharpening and are related to which energy plans will prevail concerning the exploitation and transportation of Cyprus’ natural gas and other energy resources from the South Eastern Mediterranean to Europe. The situation is being complicated by the rapprochement of Turkey-Israel, the plans of Greece and Cyprus with Israel and Egypt. The following monopoly groups are involved in all these plans: DELEK, EXXON Mobil – QATAR PETROLEUM, ENI – TOTAL, STATOIL and CAIRN – DELEK – AVNER etc.

The developments confirm that in each historical phase, the course of the Cyprus problem is connected to the inter-imperialist competition over the natural resources and the utilization of the strategic geographic situation of Cyprus. The bourgeois classes of Britain, Turkey, Greece and Cyprus bear particular responsibilities for the creation, perpetuation and sharpening of the Cyprus problem, just as the USA, NATO and the EU are heavily involved and bear responsibilities.

The systematic interventions of the USA and the EU in order to speed up the talks and for an agreement to be signed, aim at the creation of a fait accomplis, with the aim of paving the way for the exploitation of the energy deposits of the Island to the benefit of the bourgeois classes and the Euro-Atlantic plans.

They have as their aim to utilize the geostrategic position of Cyprus in the competition of the USA, NATO and the EU with Russia, in the context of the sharpening of the more general inter-imperialist contradictions that have manifested themselves in our region, where the imperialist wars in Syria, Iraq, Libya are raging.

In reality, Cyprus’ accession into the EU not only did not lead to the safeguarding of a united Cypriot state entity in favour of its people as a whole, but has been demonstrated that is an additional factor that creates difficulties, refuting the expectations that had been fostered for many years.

In addition, despite the compromises of the Greek-Cypriot side, Turkey and the Turkish-Cypriot side recycle dangerous positions, which perpetuate the consequences of the invasion-occupation and promote the partition of Cyprus. There are many statements, and also dangerous acts, which confirm our assessment in the most categorical way.

In conclusion, the euphoria that is being fostered for a solution to the Cyprus Issue does not have a real basis. The problems, which have led to today’s situation, to the perpetuation of the occupation, remain in place.

The political line that the government of Cyprus is following operates within the framework that led to the dichotomous « Annan Plan », which was neither just nor viable and its promotion entangled the peoples of Greece and Turkey into new hazards.

The expectations about a just and viable solution, which are being fostered by the governments of Greece and Cyprus, are not rooted in real evidence. The joint statement of Anastasiadis-Eroglu (February 2014) and the basic position for Two Constituent States moves in the direction of a confederal, dichotomous solution.

The Bicommunal-Bizonal Federation is being utilized in this direction, which is being promoted as central to the solution of the Cyprus problem, for an unacceptable development that will lead to a confederal partition. We note that since the 1960s, the Turkish bourgeoisie in a methodical and planned way attempted to create a fait accomplis for the creation of two states, utilizing the problems of the Zurich-London agreements, the position for the union of Cyprus with Greece, the activity of nationalist forces from both sides, and even more so the coup that was organized in Cyprus, under the responsibility of the military junta in Greece. During the 1960s,  the method of forming enclaves was used and that Turkish-Cypriots were moved to specific areas in order to form a territorial Turkish-Cypriot zone, while the Turkish aims were completed with the invasion and occupation, with « Attila 1 » and « Attila 2 », in July and August 1974 respectively. After the invasion, the Turkish state worked systematically to impose  the position for a Bicommunal-Bizonal Federation and to achieve for this position-as a compromise-to be included in the materials of the talks, as a basis on its part for a dichotomous, confederal solution, two states.

The KKE, immediately after the signing of the Joint Statement Anastasiadis-Eroglu in February 2014, focused its attention on criticizing the « two constituent states » which constitutes a confederal, dichotomous solution.

Each constituent state ( on the basis of the residual powers and in practice beyond) will have its own constitution, its own state apparatus, parliament, government and council of ministers, police, flag and anthem, its own state budget, its own policies for education, healthcare, pensions etc. Consequently, the claim that the « Bicommunal-Bizonal Federation » with two constituent states safeguards one sovereignty, one citizenship and one international personality has no basis. The « safety valves » that are being promoted through the powers of the federal state cannot objectively solve the problem. Even more so when Turkey is speaking precisely when it talks about a « partnership of two states » and mentions that the Turkish-Cypriot state is the continuation of the « Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus ».

In practice, it has been demonstrated that a tactical position, a « final compromise » of the Greek-Cypriot side, which led to the position for a Bicommunal-Bizonal Federation, was later transformed into a position of principle and foundation for the solution of the Cyprus Issue.

In this framework, we can observe the downplaying of the international character of the Cyprus problem, as a problem of invasion and occupation, the prioritization of internal (governance etc.) aspects over international ones (withdrawal of occupation troops, rights of intervention of other states, British bases etc.)

Cyprus’ continuing membership of the EU, the maintenance of British bases and military occupation forces, which are connected with the most unfavourable international correlation of forces as regards the resolution of the Cyprus problem, are taken as a given during all the years the talks have been conducted.

The « Annan Plan » made it clear that the issue of state organization (two states) is not some narrow internal aspect, but is interconnected with issues to do with international aspects of the Cyprus problem, with the involvement of the EU and powerful imperialist states.

The dichotomous solution of the Cyprus issue is a worrying international development, because apart from the fact that it does not guarantee a viable solution in favour of the people of Cyprus, it can be practically connected with the new sharpening of the contradictions in the Eastern Mediterranean, with very negative consequences for the peoples in the region.

Comrades,

The Communist Party of Greece follows, studies and takes a responsible position on the Cyprus problem. It makes a significant contribution to the denunciation of the Turkish invasion-occupation, to highlighting the international character of the problem, to expressing internationalist solidarity with the working class and popular strata of Cyprus, the Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots, Armenians, Maronites and Latins.

The KKE fights against the negative, for the peoples, plans that are developing in the framework of the antagonisms of the bourgeois classes of Greece, Turkey and Cyprus, as well as in the context of the negative and dangerous role played historically and still being played today by the USA, Britain, NATO and the EU as regards the resolution of the Cyprus problem.

The KKE comes into conflict with bourgeois nationalism, which expresses the interests of the bourgeois class only. The fact that bourgeois parties and cells of the bourgeois state had and have every interest in fostering nationalist and chauvinist confrontations and hatred amongst the peoples, so that their plans can always be facilitated on the background of the inter-imperialist contradictions, or, in other instances, in fostering bourgeois cosmopolitanism, should not mislead the peoples. Both these choices (different sides of the same coin) serve in the end the partition in an open or camouflaged way.

The KKE, alongside questions of principle, has a particular interest, as since the beginning of the 1950s the Cyprus Question was closely connected to the foreign policy of the Greek governments and as a result, in various forms, directly and indirectly, acts as a factor that impacts on internal developments in Greece.

The contradictions between the governments, as well as inside the EU and NATO, the various alliances that are created temporarily or not, have nothing to do with the interests of the peoples and the internationalist solidarity amongst them. Today, more so than before, the developments are leading very rapidly to partition and the creation of two states in essence, a plan that has existed for many years and was temporarily avoided in 2004 with the vote against the « Annan Plan », which included this trajectory.

We bear in mind that the KKE was the only political force in Greece that decisively and clearly denounced the confederal, dichotomous « Annan Plan » and supported the NO of the Cypriot people in the relevant referendum of April 2004. It  was the only party in the Greek parliament that organized mobilizations against this plan and due to the pressure exerted by it a joint statement in favour of the « Annan Plan » was prevented at the meeting of the party leaders called by the then President of the Republic in Greece.

The KKE examines the developments with as its criterion the workers’-people’s interests and focuses on the united interests of working people of Cyprus as a whole, the necessity to coordinate the struggle of the working class and popular strata of Cyprus, Turkey and Greece, confronting the situation caused by the invasion-occupation from the standpoint of the class struggle in the direction of liberation from the shackles of capitalist exploitation.

Specifically, the position of the KKE on the Cyprus problem is determined by the following axes.

  • The Cyprus problem is an international problem of the invasion and occupation of the northern part of Cyprus by Turkey. It is marked by the intervention of NATO and the more general imperialist plans in the region. The international character also arises from the relevant decisions of the UN Security Council.
  • We are in favour of the withdrawal of the occupation and all the other foreign military forces from Cyprus and more generally we support the elimination of the consequences of the Turkish occupation, the end to the settlements, the right of refugees to return to their homes and the withdrawal of the settlers, taking into account social and humanitarian criteria.
  • We support the closure of the British bases and the abolition of the special status they have enjoyed for so many years.
  • The KKE considers that the struggle of the working class and popular strata must be directed to goal for a Cyprus, where its people will be the masters, Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots, Armenians, Latins and Maronites. A Cyprus united, independent, with one single sovereignty, one citizenship and international personality, without foreign bases and troops, without foreign guarantors and protectors.
  • For the KKE, a united Cyprus means:

–A united state formation: One state and not two states.

–The right to free movement, residence and stay of working class-popular families in all areas of the Island, without conditions and commitments, regardless of whether they are Turkish-Cypriots, Greek-Cypriots, Armenians, Maronites or Latins.

–Safeguarding of labour, social-security, social rights without discriminations. Respect for the right of all people to speak their language and for their children to be educated. Respect for the religious choices and cultural traditions

–On this basis, the position of the KKE for a united Cyprus fights against nationalism and ghettoization, which are caused by « bizonality » and the two « constituent states », and expresses the necessity for the united organization and joint struggle of the working class and popular strata of Cyprus, Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots, Armenians, Latins and Maronites, against the bourgeois class, against the EU, against NATO.

–The conflict against capitalist exploitation and the confrontation against the aggressiveness of capital, the struggle for goals that serve the contemporary needs of the people, even more so in the complex conditions of the sharpening inter-imperialist antagonisms and imperialist wars in our region, require the utilization of the experience that has been accumulated, the reinforcement of proletarian internationalism and the coordination of the  struggle of the working class and popular strata in Greece, Cyprus, Turkey and of other peoples in the region.

–As a whole, the joint coordinated struggle of the working class and popular strata in Greece, Cyprus, Turkey and the other peoples of the region must be directed against the monopolies and the exploitative system, for workers’-people’s power and the socialization of their wealth, for disengagement from the imperialist organizations, from the EU, from NATO, the formation of international relations, which will be based on mutual benefit. This is the basis for equal economic relations to the benefit of the peoples of different state entities.

We hope that this letter of ours shines some light on the positions of the KKE in relation to the developments regarding the Cyprus issue.

Regardless of the different views and approaches, the KKE will continue and contribute to the common struggle, to the strengthening of the friendship and solidarity between the Cypriot and Greek people, to the joint action and the development of the relations of our parties, both bilaterally and in the framework of the international communist and labour movement.

With comradely wishes for your strength,

The Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the KKE

***

AKEL Political Bureau replies to the CP of Greece (KKE) regarding the Cyprus Problem

Last Saturday, 5th November 2016, the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of AKEL sent a reply to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) regarding the Cyprus problem.

The letter is as follows:

“Dear comrades,

Within the framework of comradeship and sincerity that must characterize the relations between our parties and with respect to the right of each party to set out its position as it itself deems correct on any issue on which it considers that it should state its position, the Political Bureau of the C.C of AKEL notes the following:

  1. It considers that the new position which the KKE is today formulating, that is to say that the strategic goal of Federation in Cyprus between the two communities should be abandoned, a goal pursues for around 40 years (from the High-Level Agreement of 1977 between Makarios and Denktash) and which provides for the establishment of a bi-communal, bi-zonal, Federal structure for a reunited Republic of Cyprus, is wrong because, in our view, it is not based on a comprehensive and thorough analysis of the parameters that constitute, through a historical course over decades, what we call the Cyprus problem. The conscious acceptance by AKEL and the Cyprus people of the goal for a bizonal, bicommunal federation was the result of the new facts that were created as a result of the coup d’état of the Greek junta and EOKA B and the Turkish invasion. These given facts, the dilemma which they have posed and continue to pose before the Cypriot people as a whole is not whether we will have a Federation or a unitary state, but the dilemma Federation or partition through the gradual consolidation and legalization of the results of the invasion and war with all the disastrous consequences for the Cypriot people as well as for peace and security itself in the region.
  1. According to International Law the federalization of states constitutes only the transformation of their state structure. It is evident that AKEL would have never consented to the abolition of the Republic of Cyprus or to any arrangements that would permit the perspective of a future secession. At the same time, it is to say the least erroneous to seek after decades of negotiations the complete revision of the strategic goal of the solution of the Cyprus problem; such a development, given the current international balance of forces, would without any doubt lead to partition, that is to say the most certain form of the maintaining of imperialism in Cyprus.
  2. With the passage of time and unfortunately as a result of rulings passed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) properties are being lost, the illegal colonization of the occupied areas is continuing, children and grandchildren are by now born to settlers in Cyprus and as a result the demographic alteration of the island is intensifying. These new realities that are taking place on a day-to-day basis are having a catalytic influence and are creating negative facts in relation to our long-standing assertions on the property and territorial issue, as well as with regards to the demographic structure in Cyprus, with the obvious danger that at some point of time there would not be something for us to solve.
  3. We cannot but take into account the efforts made by the Erdogan government to completely control politically, militarily, economically, culturally and religiously the Turkish Cypriot community. For the time being there are forces within the Turkish Cypriot community which are resisting. A possible change of our position would not only dishearten but would weaken them significantly.
  4. Therefore in the face of danger of a collapse of the talks for a solution of the Cyprus problem, the perpetuation of partition and the presence of imperialism in Cyprus the only existing way to end the occupation and achieve the reunification of Cyprus and our people is to work for the federalization of Cyprus in a federal union on its agreed form. The terminology of the federated units that would make up the federal state, is without real significance as to the form of the solution and the rights to be enjoyed by citizens. Besides, this is confirmed both by science and international practice. More specifically, in different federal states we find different examples of terminology (US – states, Russia – Republics, Switzerland – cantons).
  5. Within the framework of the new state structure, an inviolable condition is that the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all citizens are safeguarded and that the preconditions for the waging of common struggle of the working class are created. We share every legitimate concern for the safeguarding and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all citizens. However, what will determine the character of the state formation that is on the negotiating table is the content of the arrangements that are under discussion. Our clear objective is their strict implementation in favour of all citizens on the basis of the Christofias-Talat convergences, as well as the defence not only of individual rights, but also of collective rights, community and national, which for the Left are of particular importance.
  6. Given that based on the current international balance of forces the fulfillment of a new strategic goal is judged as unfeasible, we are aiming to achieve through the talks improvements also of some 1960 arrangements (safety, guarantees, workability). Taking into account the crimes that were committed against the Cypriot people and that led us to the current status quo, we recall that AKEL’s long-standing assessments of the 1960 given Constitution were negative as regards its separatist character, the indecisiveness in decision-making and imperialist intervention and presence of third states it institutionalized. In particular, the arrangements it included were an obstacle to the mixing and interaction of the two communities on the island, placing the common struggle of the working class mainly on ethnic pillars. Inter alia, our insistence on cross-community and weighted voting for the election of the President and Vice President of the state, strengthen the culture of unity of our people and improves the 1960 Constitution on specific issues.
  7. We recall that an essential expression of our anti-imperialist struggle is our effort to end the Turkish NATO presence in Cyprus – which remains one of the most militarized zones in the world. Indeed, we stress that AKEL’s anti-imperialist stance in practice is confirmed by the persistent and categorical rejection of the current President’s widely known position in favour of a solution with NATO guarantees and presence of troops. This strong position of ours led to a reaffirmation of the goal of demilitarization and to the abandonment of the position in favour of NATO guarantees, which is now becoming accepted by all as a result of the perseverance of AKEL. Our goal is the restoration of our country’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.
  8. At the same time, the solution of the Cyprus problem will enable us to move forward together Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots in the struggle to end the presence of the British military bases in Cyprus.
  9. We have to also point out that, in our view, the decision of the Communist Party of Greece to change its position on the Cyprus problem should also have especially taken into account the fact that the progressive forces in both Greece and Cyprus, headed by the communists, had waged in the past fierce battles to safeguard the principle that as regards the management of the Cyprus problem the predominant position must be the one democratically expressed by the people of Cyprus and that this position must be defended by all, particularly with regards the issues that have to do with the state structure of the independent and sovereign Cypriot state. Unfortunately, this principle was violated by various pro-imperialist governments of Greece that wanted to impose developments on Cyprus and it was only then that this principle prevailed when the burden of the destruction and devastation of 1974 had become unbearable. We have no doubt that in both Greece and Cyprus, nationalist forces who are flirting with the perpetuation of the status quo and who prefer the partition of Cyprus to reunification on the basis of an honourable compromise with the Turkish Cypriot community, will exploit this change of position, and of course not in the direction, which we have no doubt, is KKE’S objective.
  1. We consider that our common commitment must be that we will take all the necessary measures to manage whatever disagreements we have between us within the framework of a comradely and sincere dialogue, with respect of one party towards the other and given that we have very important tasks to promote together within the context of the international communist and anti-imperialist movement. We regret to point out that statements made recently by some KKE leading cadres, which concern AKEL, do not move in this direction. It is also our sincere intention, as far as it depends on us, to safeguard the historical, comradely principled relations, which characterize the relations between our parties over time.

The Political Bureau of the C.C. of AKEL”

7/11/ 2016, Nicosia

***

Response of the PB of the CC of the KKE to the CC of AKEL

Athens 9 November 2016

To the CC of the AKEL,

Dear comrades,

We received your letter dated November 4 2016 and we consider it necessary to put the following issues for your consideration. At the time when there is an attempt to finish with the Cyprus issue via a dichotomous solution, as the course of the talks between Mr. Anastasiades and Mr. Akinci demonstrates, we would say that the deeper study and utilization of the KKE’s positions by AKEL and other Cypriot and Greek parties can contribute, even at this stage, to impeding and confronting the negative developments, with a simultaneous strengthening of the struggle for a just and viable solution to the Cyprus problem.

The positions of the KKE pose certain basic facts concerning the developments in the region, informing the peoples of Cyprus and Greece that a new « Annan Plan » is being advanced, which is leading to the legitimization of the results of the Turkish invasion-occupation.

We remind you that also in 2004 it was the firm stance of the KKE which took initiatives and contributed to the exposing and final rejection of the « Annan Plan » by the Cypriot people in the relevant referendum.

The danger of the partition of Cyprus being legitimized and finalized is a crucial issue. This is what has been adopted in essence in the joint statement of Anastasiades-Eroglu on the 11th of February 2014, which is the basis of the talks.

It refers specifically to two constituent states, which will have their own borders, their own Constitution, their own governments, parliaments, national anthems, their own separate policies for education, health, welfare etc., which are factors that will divide and split the working people of Cyprus, maintain or introduce new economic-social forms of discrimination in terms of their living conditions, factors that will lead to antagonisms and not to the unity of Turkish-Cypriot and Greek-Cypriot workers.

This is the prospect that marks the solution being promoted and cancels out the reunification of the island.

On this basis, we consider your reference to the examples of the USA, Russia and Switzerland as examples of federal state entities that can justify the support for a federal state of Cyprus to be at the very least misguided and out of place. Even more so when the problem of invasion-occupation did not exist in any of these examples. These examples have absolutely no relationship with the conditions and the course of the creation of the Cyprus problem, which has its own dramatic history, a fact that you can clearly accept, confronting this objective reality with greater calmness.

In reality, the longstanding imperialist intervention in Cyprus, the activity of nationalist forces, the junta-style coup under the responsibility of the Greek Colonels’ dictatorship as well and with the guidance of the USA, and also the Turkish invasion-occupation created the terrain for negative developments. These were later accelerated by the fait accomplis caused by the creation of the false state, the so-called « Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus » in 1983, which seeks to constitute the basis today for the Turkish-Cypriot « constituent state ».

The experience from the perpetuation of the Cyprus problem 42 years after the invasion is something that must make us reflect more about the non-mobilization of the people and their passive expectation of a « solution from above », from powerful capitalist states and imperialist unions (NATO-EU) that bear responsibilities for the creation and perpetuation of the problem.

The compromise that has been made, the  « painful compromise » , which both AKEL and the other parties in Cyprus and Greece talked about, which led to the position for a Bicommunal-Bizonal Federation and was mainly  the longstanding position of the bourgeois class of Turkey and the Turkish-Cypriot « state »,  reached the point of being considered a divine law, a position of principle. And indeed it is not just this, but today it is developing in essence into a dichotomous solution, into two constituent states.

In reality, we are not talking about a federation, as it is being promoted to the Cypriot workers, but a confederation of two states, which, we repeat, will each have their own state apparatus, their own organs, i.e. their own sovereignty, their own domestic and foreign policy, negating the principle of one sovereignty, one citizenship and one international personality.

For these reasons, the KKE, studying the developments and particularly the painful positions of the « Annan Plan », the content of the Anastasiades-Eroglu joint statement of 2014 about two constituent states and the issues that were raised during the recent negotiations, decided to speak openly, publicly, to explaining to you now, before it is too late, its position about a bicommunal, bizonal federation, which it had also in the past adopted as a compromise, expressing in this way its support for AKEL, and which it defines in the current conditions after deep and detailed study of the developments that were collectively discussed by our CC.

Specifically, our party insists that:

The Cyprus problem is an international problem of invasion and occupation of the northern part of Cyprus by Turkey, which bears the mark of NATO’s intervention and the more general imperialist plans in the region.

That the occupying and other foreign military forces must depart, that the British bases must be closed. It defends the principles for one sovereignty, one citizenship and one international personality and takes a specific position on the problem of the refugees and settlers.

These principles constitute the content of the KKE’s positions for a united independent Cyprus, for one and not two states, without guarantors and protectors, which provides the right for the free movement, residence and stay of working class-popular families in all areas of the Island, without conditions and commitments, regardless of whether they are Turkish-Cypriots, Greek-Cypriots, Armenians, Maronites or Latins.

Safeguarding of labour, social-security, social rights without discriminations. Respect for the right of all people to speak their language and for their children to be educated. Respect for the religious choices and cultural traditions

This proposal truly fights against nationalism, respects (in practice) the rights of the Turkish-Cypriots, Greek-Cypriots, Maronites, Armenians and Latins, is based on the class interests of the working class of Cyprus and strengthens the common struggle of the working people, in opposition to « bizonality » and « ghettoization » which are included in the solution being promoted by the Cypriot government, with the joint responsibility of the Greek government, the USA, the EU.

In Cyprus, during the management of bourgeois power, multifaceted alliances amongst the political forces of Cyprus have taken place and continue to take place, also with the participation of your party and it is your responsibility to identify and substantiate which forces you consider to be nationalist in your country.

What we want to note is that the directed and guided talk, which attempts to claim that the positions of the KKE nourish nationalist forces, is at the very least ridiculous and underhand. Every rational person can understand that nationalism is only really damaged by the political line that opposes ghettos and retrenchment, which are being formed by the policy of two states that reproduces all forms of discrimination and also obstacles for the joint struggle of the Cypriot people.

Clearly the Cypriot people carry and will carry the main burden as regards the solution to the Cyprus problem and it is they who will be called on to decide. However, we must take into account that this is an international problem and its consequences will affect the Greek people and the other peoples of the region. Even more so when the Greek governments and the political forces of our country are involved in the Cyprus problem, and so the KKE has the obligation, as it did in all the previous years, to take a stand and make its positions known. We assert nothing more than our right to have our own view on issues which in the final analysis concern all of us so that the people of our countries and region do not pay the price once again.

Our view is that there is no room for dismissive characterizations when examining such a complex problem. Who is right or wrong will be demonstrated by the course of the events themselves.

The KKE has always taken positions in a responsible way over the course of its long and heroic history. The developments themselves in relation to the Cyprus issue and other issues have up to today confirmed the predictions and positions of the KKE.

Dear comrades,

We reserve the right to publish the letter we sent to you on 19/10/16 and also our current letter, as you have proceeded to publish your response to the letter we sent you on the 19/10/16.

Honouring the struggles of the thousands of members of AKEL and EDON,

Comradely,

The Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the KKE.

***

CP of Greece, Statement of Dimitris Koutsoumpas on the Cyprus Issue

Tuesday, 10 January 2017 15:39 Communist Party of Greece

On Monday 9th of January, the GS of the CC of the KKE, Dimitris Koutsoumpas, met with the Prime Minister, in the framework of the round of meetings conducted by Alexis Tsipras with the Party Leaders in order to inform them about the developments concerning the Cyprus negotiations.

After the meeting, the GS of the CC of the KKE made the following statement:

« The Cyprus Issue is a problem of invasion and occupation. If we want to talk about a negotiation which will lead to a solution, that means first of all the immediate withdrawal of all the occupation forces. That means the abolition of the regime of guarantees.

A solution means one state and not two states. A single, viable state, with one sovereignty, one citizenship, one international personality, a common homeland for Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots, without foreign bases, guarantors and protectors. Today, the negotiation is essentially being undermined first and foremost by the Turkish leadership, as well by the Turkish-Cypriot one, with the involvement of other powers and big interests, such as the USA, as it is a negotiation that in essence takes place in the framework of a dichotomous solution.

What is needed today is the greatest possible vigilance on the part of the people of Greece and the people of Cyprus »


Articles Par : Comaguer

Avis de non-responsabilité : Les opinions exprimées dans cet article n'engagent que le ou les auteurs. Le Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation se dégage de toute responsabilité concernant le contenu de cet article et ne sera pas tenu responsable pour des erreurs ou informations incorrectes ou inexactes.

Le Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation (CRM) accorde la permission de reproduire la version intégrale ou des extraits d'articles du site Mondialisation.ca sur des sites de médias alternatifs. La source de l'article, l'adresse url ainsi qu'un hyperlien vers l'article original du CRM doivent être indiqués. Une note de droit d'auteur (copyright) doit également être indiquée.

Pour publier des articles de Mondialisation.ca en format papier ou autre, y compris les sites Internet commerciaux, contactez: [email protected]

Mondialisation.ca contient du matériel protégé par le droit d'auteur, dont le détenteur n'a pas toujours autorisé l’utilisation. Nous mettons ce matériel à la disposition de nos lecteurs en vertu du principe "d'utilisation équitable", dans le but d'améliorer la compréhension des enjeux politiques, économiques et sociaux. Tout le matériel mis en ligne sur ce site est à but non lucratif. Il est mis à la disposition de tous ceux qui s'y intéressent dans le but de faire de la recherche ainsi qu'à des fins éducatives. Si vous désirez utiliser du matériel protégé par le droit d'auteur pour des raisons autres que "l'utilisation équitable", vous devez demander la permission au détenteur du droit d'auteur.

Contact média: med[email protected]