1. My feeling although I am
not in K.K 's head is that today he really wants to say -no- but
he cannot due to the international pressure and diplomacy.
2. I believe that all these
fears you present are much less important compared on what you
lose by signing today. One think you lose (and can not take back
in case the plan wont work) is the sovereignty on an independent
country - with anan plan you have accepted foreign control/veto
on many things such as the constitution etc.
3. We should be happy to see
the north be prosperous and rich but not with money from the south
only. We can not accept the cost of the Turkish invasion to be
payed be the new Federation that is practically financed by Greek
Cypriots money coming from hard work of 30 years after a destructive
3.I think by the end of the
year 2004 the international political arena will be very different
and with Cyprus in eu as a full member a new and ameliorated UN
plan for both Greek and Turkish Cypriots will be possible based
on free movement in the whole island and full human and political
rights for everybody in their specific homeland (no quotas).
Governments should also inform
the people on their plans earlier (if they expect a positive vote)
and not wait the last minute. It will take time and patient to
accept some facts in Cyprus even if the anan plan was perfect
Extreme right elements in Greece
are less than 5% and are isolated in all parties- truly they do
not interfere nd nor pasok policies.everybody is trying to hold
the difficult and more open center (slightly right or left) voters.
Last but not least I always
was in favour of Turkey joining the e.u. because Greece has only
to win but I believe that it shall be extremely difficult - in
that I agree with Georges policy. France, Germany and other countries
will block it the last minute and will prefer a special form of
monetary agreement instead.
My main argument is that the so-called diplomatic approach on
the part of New Democracy lead instead to a support for the no
vote. New Democracy wants to say yes however it worries that such
an open position will hurt it with the extreme right elements
during the Euro-elections. In my book N.D. is sacrificing the
big questions of Cyprus for internal political gain (see high
gallop count for Karamanlis' because people interpret the "neutral"
position as a "no."
As for what is written about
Northern Cyprus, indeed we get the bad end of the stick. But that
is nothing compared to what will be going on against us after
tomorrow's no vote. The embargo will be lifted, for one thing,
and for another, we who have called on the international community
for the past 30 years to help solve the Cyprus problem have no
turned a deaf ear to that community's proposals and it will be
their turn to turn a dear ear to our entreaties. As for the specifics
of the Anan plan, i have written my previous article on that and
I still come out in favor of it, as does Vasileiou, as did Christophias.
the main problem was that Papadopoulos was against it from the
get-go and Caramanlis' stance did nothing to improve our bargaining
position in Lucerne.
I think that getting Cyprus into the EU was an unprecedented achievement
that shows the results of steady diplomacy on the part of george
Papandreou, an event that nobody expected and went against all
1. Although i do not agree with some of your points, you surely
in politics one reads through the lines Diplomacy is to serve
the interests of a country. Sometimes stating your position in
such a ''diplomatic'' way can keep your friends close and your
enemies closer (enemies=persons/countries/bodies that at the specific
time have different interests than your countrys).
2. Another issue is to discuss the pros-cons of the Anan Plan
needs time and analysis. Maybe in a future conference of INADE.
3. Just for your info i enclose a statement of an ex Ambassador
on the Cyprus Occupation. If you read tha last issue of Economist
not a word of (invasion, occupation etc) the word used is ''Turkish
Army Overran the
North Part of the Island''!!! the problem of Greece is that it
should be more extraverted in communicating its policies (and
interests) stadily and profesionaly.