Replies

From,

http://argument.independent.co.uk/letters/story.jsp?story=517605

Cyprus, Iraq and others

03 May 2004

Diplomatic response to Cyprus vote has been disappointing

Sir: As a former mediating officer in Cyprus, may I comment on your
coverage of the referenda in the island? You report on diplomatic fury
at the Greek Cypriots. Nowhere do you suggest that, as I believe to be
the case, it is the international community that has again failed Cyprus
and that rejection stemmed from flaws in the final version of the Annan
Plan ("Annan 5").

Sadly the plan stemmed from a top-down approach and sought for a
compromise with extreme Turkish military sentiment, rather than to build
on the social consensus that does exist and on UN and EU principles. The
timing imposed by EU-accession also proved unworkable, leaving no margin
for final consideration and amendment. And the pre-voting pressures
applied by the US and UK, whose policies during the Cold War were a
principal cause of communal separation, were clearly counterproductive.

Those known to me who worked most strongly for communal reconciliation
felt betrayed by Annan 5, believed that it would ultimately perpetuate
division and with great reluctance voted against it. And, in contrast to
his current demonisation, Tassos Papadopoulos is a pragmatist who was
the leading proponent of communal reintegration under Makarios and who
always has been committed to Turkish Cypriot rights. His stand has
consistently been against the improper meddling in Cypriot affairs of
the Turkish army and other foreigners.

The knee-jerk reaction to the vote so far displayed by EU and US
diplomats is discouraging. They should remember that it was the Turkish
invasion that dismembered Cyprus and the then failure of the
international community to secure the departure of the Turkish army that
created the problem with which they are now faced. They would do well to
analyse why Annan 5 was rejected and see how a positive way forward can
be facilitated.

MARTIN PACKARD
Banbury, Oxfordshire