PRESS AND INFORMATION OFFICE
06/06/2017 9:51
Συνέντευξη Τύπου του Ειδικού Συμβούλου του ΓΓ του ΟΗΕ για την Κύπρο
Ο Ειδικός Σύμβουλος του Γενικού Γραμματέα του ΟΗΕ για την Κύπρο κ. Espen Barth Eide παραχώρησε χθες το μεσημέρι, στην έδρα των Ηνωμένων Εθνών, συνέντευξη Τύπου προς τους δημοσιογράφους με θέμα το δείπνο εργασίας που παραχώρησε, την περασμένη Κυριακή, ο Γενικός Γραμματέας των Ηνωμένων Εθνών κ. Antonio Guterres προς τον Πρόεδρο της Δημοκρατίας κ. Νίκο Αναστασιάδη και τον Τουρκοκύπριο ηγέτη κ. Mustafa Akinci και απάντησε σε ερωτήσεις τους.
Παρατίθεται το απομαγνητοφωνημένο κείμενο της συνέντευξης Τύπου:
Espen Barth Eide:
Thank you very much Stιphane [UNSG’s spokesperson] and, as you have just said, we had a working dinner last night. The Secretary-General hosted the dinner for Mr Nicos Anastasiades, the Greek Cypriot leader, and Mr Mustafa Akinci, the Turkish Cypriot leader, and the topic of the dinner was to ask them whether they felt that we are now readying to go for a final Conference, in the Conference on Cyprus in Geneva. And after a long and intense and open and honest discussion over four hours, the outcome was that, yes, the two leaders are committed to ask the Secretary-General to reconvene the Conference on Cyprus in Geneva.
It will be reconvened in June, most likely in the latter half of June, and the Secretary-General and myself we will now reaching out to Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom and the European Union, who are, the three first, the guarantor powers, and the European Union, an observer to this Conference. And this constitutes that the membership of the Conference, and we are happy with the fact that we have an agreement between the leaders rather that we are now able to reconvene the Conference and see if we are able to go the final mile and actually have a settlement in Cyprus.
A lot of work still remains and I have been entrusted by yesterday’s meeting with the task to now reach out and continue a dialogue with all the participants of the Conference on the issue of creating a common document, which will be the basis for the discussions in the Conference on the chapter on Security and Guarantees. Because the Cyprus negotiations happen in a way on two levels: One level is all those issues that relate to the Cypriots themselves and that’s what we’ve called the bicommunal talks between the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot leader, which I facilitate, but then we have the international dimension because of the continued existence of international treaties that inscribes Cyprus into the local security, regional security system and in order to further develop, change or abolish or invent something new we need the parties to those treaties involved.
So, those discussions have to happen between not only the Cypriot sides, but also the guarantor powers and because a united Cyprus would be an EU member, the European Commission also has to be involved in this, as they were in the original Conference.
So, the Secretary-General is happy with the outcome and I’m glad we come to this point, but we also want to be very clear that a lot of work remains to be done and will be done in the coming weeks before we are able to meet in Geneva later this month.
Question: Thanks a lot and obviously you worked hard yesterday, but I wanted to ask the issue of hydrocarbons, did this come up? I know it’s been a matter of some controversy of Cyprus seeks to begin exploring was this discuss upstairs? And also I’ve asked Stιphane a couple of times, I think you would know this, just if you can give a bolt part figure you said that when you “when actually employed” you are an UN Envoy, so just if you can estimate in the last –you know-year, 365 days, how many of those days have you been employed. Thanks
Eide: That’s two different questions. Hydrocarbon was not discussed yesterday, apart from a brief mention, but that’s because I think all sides are fully aware of the argument that with the settlement, hydrocarbon, as both leaders have said in many speeches and statements, hydrocarbons could be a conducive element in the case of a solution because the resources could be shared and it will be easier to develop a regional energy hub with the settlement. I don’t want to make more statements about that; it was not the topic of yesterday’s discussion.
So, when I am actually employed. I basically only do this; I have no other employment now because since these talks really took off roughly a full year ago, this has been my main effort. So, I basically work most of the time of this, something like a 20 days a week, no a month, but I do not the exact numbers but this is what I am doing and I am not doing no other things.
Question (Daily Consult Arabic): Thank you. I would like to hear more about the atmosphere, about the details of the meetings, the kind of topics discussed; how the atmosphere between “the two presidents” can you give us a little bit more detail about the meeting and the working dinner? Thank you.
Eide: I would say the climate was what we called “frank and honest”, meaning that the two sides have a shared vision of a united Cyprus. That’s been clear to me for all the time I’ve been working with them. But they have some disagreements about how that to come about, in particularly how to order the different issues on the way there and this is exactly why the Secretary-General wanted to meet them because similarly terms let by myself a few weeks ago to try to get them to common ground on how to reconvene Geneva did not lead to a success and I (…) rated to the Secretary-General and his response was let me see them and meet them together here and the meeting was good and it was friendly, but, I should not hide that there were different views and that the Secretary-General used his diplomatic skills to get to a common agreement.
But, at the end of the day, I think that both sides are happy that we had a prospective. I will underline the two main elements of that, Security and Guarantees is an essential element for both communities, because, if you are not secure, why would you vote “yes” to a settlement agreement. At the same time, it has to be understood that this is interdependent with other issues, because Security is not only a question of troops and foreign guarantees, is also about how you organize the state and how your internal structures work and I think that the agreement that we came up with and the statement that reflects it, basically (…) what was most important for both sides in a balance and constructive way.
We wouldn’t have been where we are, because everyone who follows this –not only myself and my team, but the leaders themselves and any other analysts working on Cyprus- seem to agree that the leaders have come further than in any previous attempts. As you know there have been many attempts –including the Annan Plan, which failed in the end-, but they’ve never been as close and that is because of this personal trust and chemistry that was developed and that we saw particularly in the early days between the leaders. But then, half a year ago, I detected something, which I also said publicly, which is that we are now in this final mile, and in the final mile there is a particular form of nervousness, because as a leader you are beginning to see that a solution is possible, but only if you –yourself- are giving those final accommodations and concessions that haven’t been given before and seeing from the outside, for the rest of us, creating a peace deal is obviously the heroic thing to do. But from them, they don’t disagree with that, but they also have to remind themselves and remember where are the boundaries of my own community’s willingness to come along with that. So, that nervousness, of course, creates certain tensions, but I also know from working intensively with them overall this phases, we have talked about this earlier, at the end of the day, they tend up to agree on something and when they do they are happy.
Question: Thank you for this briefing and the progress that you’ve made so far. I want to ask you how is Turkey’s rise in authoritarianism following the consolidation of power in the referendum affected the negotiations?
Eide: Developments in relevant neighbouring states, including Turkey, is of course high in my agenda and I spend much time there and I engaged closely with them and the question of domestic development in Turkey is relevant for my work. But, I have to say that, so far, I feel that Turkey, as Greece, they are both committed to finding a settlement. They are not yet on the same page on what that settlement is. But, they both see that, they tell me, that it’s their strategic interest in the regional and global developments if the Cyprus problem can be solved and we could lay behind us, and I take some hope from the fact that this is something they continue to tell me they are easily accessible, I speak with the Foreign Minister and the Foreign Ministry, I speak with the President’s Office, I speak with the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister’s Office and I have a good and deep dialogue with the leaders of power in Turkey on this issue and that also with Greece. So, I haven’t seen change in their position on the Cyprus problem, and if I have seen some, I’ve almost seen them become more eager to try to be constructive to find a settlement, because, I think it fits well into bigger issues of relationship to Europe, energy, developments etc.
Question: The Turkish troops have been a stand point on that. The President of Turkey, I doubt, will ever withdraw troops anywhere and, secondly, since the last negotiations that ended up fruitless, there seems to be a lot more crossing green lines and association between the two communities. Is this helping the talks or how much further do they have to go?
Eide: There is a significant civil society effort and there are a number of groups of Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots who come together over the last weeks when these talks have been in this very critical stage. We’ve seen a lot of expressions on that and I think that both the leaders and I, myself, we welcome that because it’s an expression that a lot of Cypriots, normal Cypriots from all works of their lives would like to see an end to this many, many years of this issue.
And on the issue of the Turkish troops they are actually two issues on the Security and Guarantees chapter. It’s the issue of the Treaty of Guarantees and then is the Treaty of Alliance. The Treaty of Alliance from 1960 was authorized the presence of foreign troops on the first place and the Treaty of Guarantees is what, according to Turkey, authorized what happened in 1974, which is contested by the other side. So, what we are looking into is if there is a way to create a common security vision for Cyprus for the 21st century, not so much building on the 1960 realities, but more relying on the 2017 realities, which provides a change for those who need change, but also continuity for those who need some kind of continuity because the Turkish Cypriot community tells us that they need to be assured in some form about the fact that they are being numerically the smaller community that they are still will be safe and sound not only for secure for life and property, but also of the security of the community identity, togetherness as Turkish Cypriots, while, at the same time, this being achieved in such way that it is not creating a sort of insecurity of the Greek Cypriots.
So, what we are doing and what we will be doing in the coming weeks is to continue to elaborate on some ideas we have, which we already informally shared with all the participants about a new model that would be different, but we still provide some new neutral assurances, some kind of international oversight of the implementation of the Treaty. Because, in many peace agreements –and I have been involved in many those-, some successful and some not so successful, but what I do know is that you may come to a point where the two sides actually like what is on the paper, but they would question whether the other side will implement what is on this paper. How will I know this will be in ten years like the (…) and may be then there is a role of the UN and all the international bodies to take the role to overseen that implementation until things have move on in such a way that things have become normal and people not need it any longer.
So, when I said on the beginning that there is a long way to go is particularly on those issues. How to elaborate the security system that creates a sense of security in both communities and for all Cypriots but without the security of one being the source of insecurity of the other.
Question: Thank you Mr Eide. A couple of follow ups to last night’s statement. First, the Secretary-General said of course that the talks are going to take place this month and when he was asked as he was leaving, he said “soon”. I understand that drilling is supposed to start in Cyprus by mid-July. Is this a target for finishing these talks and, hopefully, an agreement? And secondly, you had said in late May that both sides are closer to an agreement that many people expected. Does this agreement last night moved the ball closer to that and, if so, how much and how far is there to go? Thank you.
Eide: I don’t, first I am not going to say more about the hydrocarbon issue. It was not discussed yesterday, it is not the focus of my work, my focus of my work is now to get (…)
Question: Excuse me, I wasn’t asking about the hydrocarbon issue, I was only asking about the timing.
Eide: Yes, but that’s what I am answering, I am not making a connection between this. But, there is a sentiment among both sides and have expressed to me earlier already on the 17th of May, when we actually tried. So, on the 17th of May, in a meeting I chaired in Cyprus, we were trying to come to an agreement not very different from what happened yesterday and they both said –the leaders themselves, Anastasiades and Akinci- that they would ideally see this conference taking place in June. So that June already developed then and their reasoning for June was that, basically, we have done what we can done, we have achieved what we can be achieved, in the current format of one chapter after another, one item after another, is time to see how this things are interrelated. We have to bring in the Security and Guarantees dimension. That issue can only be adequately addressed with the presence of the guarantors, and that means Geneva. So, they agree to that, and the problem we had until last night, was the sequence and ordering of that, not the aim of doing conference in Geneva. So and when we did not have a date that is for a very simple reason, only two of participants were present in the room. We need to agree with Greece, Turkey and the UK as well to inform the EU who is an observer, and only then we can set up a date. But I’m saying is June and we are talking about the second half of June.
Question: And in terms of how long this conference would go, do you see it as open-ended, because I noticed that the last one went for, I think, three days and then followed by the guarantors.
Eide: Good question, the conference is actually on is just not is session. The conference started in the morning of the 12th of January and it hasn’t closed. So, what we are talking about is to reconvene as having the third session. We had the first session, which was just one day, then next week we had a couple of days at the deputy’s level and then we were planning to come back quickly to Geneva. We had some other events which let to stall of talks for unrelated issues and when the talks started we now decided to come back.
So, it is in principle open-ended. It means that we will eventually have a start date, we will not have an end date, because the end date is when we solve the problem or of course conclude that it is unsolvable –hopefully not- but, we are not declaring a number of days. We hope, we believe it will take some time maybe we are talking about after two weeks.
Question: And you didn’t answer my second question which was about your comment about being closer than thought this is moving forward.
Eide: What I meant by that is first we had a lot of actually agreements which covers most of the issues in the fourth chapters that have been most intensively discussed, Governance and Power sharing, it’s Property, it’s Economy and EU matters and if you answer that understanding, the share understanding of where we will end up in other issues, I would say that on five chapters the leaders, while we do not have all the agreements on paper, they have a reasonably good outline in their head about what, where this will end up. The chapter that has been least developed is the chapter of Security and Guarantees and the idea now is that we need to give a certain emphasis on this chapter because it is very important for both communities. It’s an area where they have opposing starting positions and in order to be able to see across all chapters in the final-final phase we need to put some more, let’s say meat on the bone of that chapter as well.
So, in that sense, the answer is yes. We got a little closer because we have a modality by which we can do that, which we didn’t have before last night, so, I would say that became just a little bit truer. But, I want to say that always with reference to my point about last mile. You may be 89% done, but that doesn’t mean that the remaining percent are the easy ones, they are by definition the difficult ones and that’s why they have been outstanding up until now, because if they were easy they would have been solved. So they end game of such processes are always some more intense than let’s say the early days, we know that.
Thank you.
