Interview by Andri Daniel
“Tufan Erhürman is a cultivated and high-quality person. He is defined by his ambition for the Turkish Cypriot community to be integrated into the European space. He understands that this can only happen through a solution and reunification. Turkey created the space that allowed Erhürman to be elected, and that is of enormous significance.”
Turkey created the conditions that allowed Tufan Erhürman to be elected to the Turkish Cypriot leadership, says Ambassador Andreas Mavroyiannis, former negotiator, in an interview with Politis. He expresses his conviction that Cypriots are ready for a solution to a bizonal, bicommunal federation, recalling the six Guterres points at Crans-Montana and describing in detail where the negotiations stopped and from where the dialogue could resume.
He speaks about Erhürman, a pro-European and western-oriented leader, who could create the prospects for reunification. Mr Mavroyiannis also lists the main obstacles that must be managed in order for dialogue to move forward and outlines his vision for a solution to the Cyprus problem.
Are we ready for a change of course in the Cyprus problem, Mr Mavroyiannis?
The election of Tufan Erhürman to the Turkish Cypriot leadership is in itself a development in the right direction. This does not mean much, but it does open a small window. From here on, there must be proper handling on both sides to ensure good preparation and create a new opportunity in the Cyprus problem, one that requires political will and good faith.
The last significant development in the Cyprus problem was the Berlin meeting in November 2019, where we had agreed to continue the dialogue from where we had left off at Crans-Montana. At the same time, it was confirmed that there was agreement on governance, with political equality and a rotating presidency. It had also been agreed that after the elections in the occupied areas, the dialogue would resume. Then came the pandemic, the postponement of the elections, and Tatar’s election in 2020, a series of negative developments that left us trying to return to a path of negotiation.
The Prospects for a Solution
Is Tufan Erhürman the new Akıncı?
Every political leader has his own personality. I would not say that he is the same as Mr Akıncı. Tufan Erhürman is a cultivated and high-quality individual politically and intellectually. His views on society are those of a secular, western-oriented man. He is deeply pro-European, and that defines his approach: his ambition is for the Turkish Cypriot community to be part of the European family. He understands that this can only be achieved through a solution and reunification.
'Turkey created the space for Erhürman to be elected'
How can dialogue be restarted?
Turkey created the space that allowed Erhürman to be elected, and that is of great significance because it shows that the prevailing doctrine in Turkey revolves around foreign policy, as conducted by Mr Fidan, leading to a number of tactical manoeuvres including the need to create movement on the Cyprus problem.
On one hand, this is to prevent Turkey from being blamed for the total lack of progress, as has recently been the case; on the other, it serves major objectives of Turkish foreign policy, such as EU–Turkey relations, participation in the new European defence programme SAFE, modernisation of the Customs Union, a special relationship with Europe, and energy matters. Within this framework, we must also view new initiatives such as the revival by Greece of the old idea of a Five-Party Conference.
Participation of Turkish Cypriots in Negotiations
How can there be a Five-Party Conference with the participation of the Turkish Cypriot community?
That is the big problem. Otherwise, Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, Egypt, and Libya all have an objective stake in this process, as they are the states bordering the northern and southern parts of the Eastern Mediterranean.
If a way can be found to overcome the difficulty that Turkey does not recognise the Republic of Cyprus and wants the so-called “TRNC” to participate, that would be the most decisive step towards finding solutions.
Would a technical committee be a tactical way to allow the Turkish Cypriot community to participate in an expanded Five-Party format?
There are very serious issues of legality. It is not possible for the Republic of Cyprus to sit at the same table with an illegal entity. What could be done, for example, is for the Turkish Cypriots to be part of the Turkish delegation.
Other arrangements might not be entirely satisfactory to anyone, but it is important to respect international law and legitimacy and to find practical ways to resolve problems. It is not absolutely necessary for someone to recognise you in order to cooperate - there are ways to make it work.
The Six Guterres points
When you say to resume from where we left off - where exactly did we stop? On property, constitutional matters, territory? Where should we begin?
We left off with the six points that the UN Secretary-General submitted at Crans-Montana, which sought to address the most fundamental aspects of the Cyprus problem.
Those six points in themselves would not have constituted a full solution to the Cyprus problem. They represented a strategic framework that would have made the path towards a solution irreversible.
They dealt with key issues: territory, property, governance, the treatment of Turkish nationals in Cyprus after a settlement, the question of guarantees, and the presence of troops.
Our side had submitted its positions in writing on 5 and 6 July 2017, which were informally welcomed by the UN Secretary-General. I believe that is where we left things and essentially, our side had accepted all six of the UN Secretary-General’s points.
On the property issue, a lot of work had been done. The Secretary-General told us: “Do not expect me to understand every detail of the property issue. Whatever has been achieved so far as part of the acquis of the process is valid; from there, we should take into account what has been agreed and the priorities: to give greater weight to the owner in areas subject to territorial adjustment, and greater weight to the user in areas that will not be adjusted territorially.”
This was a logical approach that avoided socioeconomic upheaval. Technical details remain, but we had agreed with Mr Akıncı on the principle of respecting property rights. That does not necessarily mean full restitution. Where restoration is not possible or not advisable, there are alternative remedies such as compensation, exchange, or mixed solutions.
The idea is not for leaders or negotiators to replace citizens in the pursuit of their property rights, but to create the framework through which those rights can be exercised.
Differences from the Annan Plan
How does this differ from the Annan Plan?
The Annan Plan stated that up to one-third of properties could be returned, and that once the plan was approved, all applications before European courts would be withdrawn. We knew this could not work.
You were against the Annan Plan…
Exactly because it did not respect property rights. It’s one thing to have your right recognised and to seek a remedy and quite another for the United Nations, through arbitration, to decide how your property right will be regulated.
Where We Stood at Crans-Montana
And regarding the other issues - where did we stand at Crans-Montana?
On the matter of guarantees, the UN Secretary-General requested their immediate abolition, which Turkey did not accept, it only agreed to a review after a number of years.
As for troops, the Secretary-General’s six points included a proposal for drastic reduction, roughly aligning with the Treaty of Alliance numbers, meaning 650 Turkish troops, and suggested that the final withdrawal of the remaining forces be discussed later in an extended meeting with the Prime Ministers of Greece, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.
Cypriots Ready for a Solution
Do you believe the time has matured - that we are ready to embrace a new process leading to a settlement of the Cyprus problem?
I believe so. The majority of people in both communities are ready for a solution to the Cyprus problem, under certain conditions: that it will not be a leap into the unknown, that it will clearly improve the situation, and that there will be a responsible political leadership willing to shoulder the weight and responsibility of moving things forward.
During Ersin Tatar’s term, was a wall built between the two communities?
It was a dead period, mainly because Mr Tatar did not believe in reunification. He forcefully reintroduced Rauf Denktaş’s old idea of two states and sovereign equality, with Turkey’s full backing. The main problem was that he set these as preconditions for resuming dialogue.
Now that Erhürman has Turkey’s blessing, how will he approach the negotiating table?
I believe he will receive a framework from Turkey, the limits within which he will be able to negotiate. There will be some movement, but it is too early to say what substantive changes may occur.
Trump, the President, and the '16-second conversation'
Did Trump put Cyprus on his agenda, for ending the occupation?
It undermines all notions of seriousness and dignity to claim that during a 16-second meeting, the President greeted Trump, he recognised him, and they discussed the Cyprus problem. That is a humiliation, it deeply offended me, this mockery.
Candidate for the 2028 elections?
Would Andreas Mavroyiannis consider running again for President of the Republic in 2028?
Andreas Mavroyiannis has never been part of party politics, but I have always been an active citizen. I was not taught to say no when I feel a duty towards my country. So, I do not rule out the possibility of seeking the Presidency again, but it’s something I will decide after consulting my close circle in the near future.
I do feel, however, that some expectations have been created among the public regarding me and I find it difficult to disappoint them.
What did you wish to the new Turkish Cypriot leader?
I wished him fair winds in the message I sent, for the Turkish Cypriot community, for Cyprus, and for Europe.
Full interview in Greek: