|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
Cyprus: referendum on the Annan Plan
By Justus Leicht
24 April 2004
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
On April 24 a referendum will be held in Cyprus over the plan
for the reunification of the island put forward by UN General
Secretary Kofi Annan. There will be separate votes in the Turkish
north of the island and the Greek south. Should both halves of
the island accept the plan, a united Cyprus will take up membership
in the European Union on May 1. Should either the north or the
south, or both parts of the island, vote no, then only the Greek
half will join the EU.
According to the latest opinion polls a majority will vote
for the plan in the Turkish north, while it is expected that a
clear majority will vote against in the Greek south.
In Northern Cyprus only President Rauf Denktash and a minority
of extreme right-wing nationalists, much of whose support comes
from settlers from the Turkish mainland, are campaigning publicly
for a rejection of the Annan Plan. Thirty years ago Denktash and
his clique established the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus and
have dominated politics there ever since. The republic has been
officially recognised only by Turkey. In parliamentary elections
last December the nationalist parties close to Denktash suffered
a devastating defeat against a background of a series of mass
demonstrations demanding the reunification of the island.
Recently Denktashs support in Turkey has been limited
to Bülent Ecevits Democratic Left Party (DSP)which
in 1974 ordered the intervention of Turkish troops in Cyprusand
the Islamic fundamentalist Felicity Party (SP) led by Necmettin
Erbakan, which in 1974 sat in the ruling coalition headed by Ecevit.
Denktash also has the support of a handful of fascist groups.
None of these organisations currently has representation in the
Turkish parliament. For its part, the Turkish military has made
known its reservations about the Annan Plan, but has not officially
rejected it.
The head of the Turkish government, Recep Tayip Erdogan, leader
of the moderate Islamic AKP (Party of Justice and Development),
supports the Annan Plan in order to improve Turkeys own
chances of entry into the European Union. He expressed his annoyance
with a recent tour of Turkey made by Denktash, saying that the
latter should say what he wants to say in Cyprus. This was the
first time in 30 years that Denktash has had to face such a negative
reaction from a Turkish prime minister.
Following considerable pressure from both Washington and Brussels,
the Greek government and opposition have also spoken out in favour
of accepting the plan. In southern Cyprus, on the other hand,
President Tassos Papadopoulos, a majority of the media and parties,
including (after initial wavering) the Stalinist AKEL, the Greens
and the right-wing DIKO, are all campaigning for a rejection of
the plan. The Greek Orthodox Church has gone so far as to designate
the plan as the work of Satan.
Should these different positions be confirmed in the election
it would mean the transformation in a short period of time of
the usual state of affairs: until now Turkish-Cypriot opposition
was always regarded as the main obstacle to reunification. Hopes
of overcoming deeply rooted social problems, widespread unemployment
and poverty have proven in this case to be more powerful than
all forms of nationalism. On the other hand, in the Greek south,
chauvinist arguments appear to have the upper hand: the rejection
of any sort of guarantees for, or concessions to the Turkish minority,
and diffuse worries about the costs involved in the economic development
of the poverty-stricken north, which has suffered decades of international
isolation. Additional concerns revolve around the perceived threat
of Turkish cheap labour.
The Annan Plan
The World Socialist Web Site decisively rejects the
chauvinist arguments used by reactionary forces in the north and
south to oppose the reunification of the island. The Annan Plan,
however, does not represent an alternative. Despite all propaganda
to the contrary, the plan will only serve to increase and not
weaken chauvinism; it will cement rather than overcome divisions
on the islanddividing rather than uniting the different
communities. Its real aim is to exploit Cypruss location
at a strategic intersection in the eastern Mediterranean, and
establish stable relations for the development of the island as
an economic platform and military base for interventions by the
US and EU in North Africa and the Near and Middle East.
The name proposed for the new state is the United Cyprus
Republic, but a more appropriate name would be the Divided
Republic of Turkish and Greek Cyprus. While the island will
have a common national government with its own flag and national
anthem, it will in fact consist of two sub-states which will be
empowered to carry out their own economic and foreign policy,
as well as determine their own forms of separate citizenship.
Article 3 of the constitution expressly stipulates that the
exercise of political rights is tied to ethnic identityto
the so-called status of internal partial state citizenship.
The article further states: Other than in elections of senators,
which shall be elected by Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots
separately, political rights at the federal level shall be exercised
based on internal constituent state citizenship status. Political
rights at the constituent state and local level shall be exercised
at the place of permanent residency. No one, therefore,
can undertake political activity as a Cypriot, he must first identify
himself as Turkish or Greek.
The right of residency will also be tied to ethnic origin:
Cyprus may limit the right of Greek nationals to reside
in Cyprus if their number has reached 5 percent of the number
of resident Cypriot citizens holding Greek Cypriot internal constituent
state citizenship status, or the right of Turkish nationals to
reside in Cyprus if their number has reached 5 percent of the
number of resident Cypriot citizens holding Turkish Cypriot internal
constituent state citizenship status.
...for a transitional period a constituent state may,
pursuant to constitutional law, limit the establishment of residence
by persons hailing from the other constituent state. To this effect,
it may establish a moratorium until the end of the fifth year
after entry into force of the Foundation Agreement, after which
limitations are permissible if the number of residents hailing
from the other constituent state has reached 6 percent of the
population of a village or municipality between the 6th and 9th
years and 12 percent between the 10th and 14th years and 18 percent
of the population of the relevant constituent state thereafter,
until the 19th year or Turkeys accession to the European
Union, whichever is earlier. After the second year, no such limitations
shall apply to former inhabitants over the age of 65 accompanied
by a spouse or sibling, nor to former inhabitants of specified
villages.
In this respect it is important to recall that historically
Cyprus was not always divided into a Turkish north
and a Greek south. This first came about as the result
of the expulsion and flight of hundreds of thousands from both
communities in the 1960s and 1970s. The conflicts at that time
were actively encouraged by both the Turkish and Greek governments,
and tacitly supported by the US and the guarantor powerGreat
Britain.
Further passages in the Annan Plan stipulate how many seats
in both chambers of parliament can be taken up by deputies of
different nationalities, and what proportion of votes from both
national groups is necessary to arrive at decisions: Each
Chamber shall have 48 members. The Senate shall be composed of
an equal number of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. The Chamber
of Deputies shall be composed in proportion to persons holding
internal constituent state citizenship status of each constituent
state, provided that each constituent state shall be attributed
no less than one-quarter of seats.
Decisions of parliament shall require the approval of
both chambers by simple majority, including one-quarter of voting
senators from each constituent state. For specified matters, a
special majority of two-fifths of sitting senators from each constituent
state shall be required.
Even more complicated is the regulation regarding the Presidential
Council, which is to exercise executive powers and will,
in practice, have a right of veto in both the subordinate states.
Officially it has been stated that the constitution has been
drawn up along the lines of those of Switzerland and Belgium,
but in fact it has more in common with that of Bosnia or the Good
Friday agreement in Ireland: every citizen will be forced to define
himself in terms of a nation determined by race or religion. The
nations which have then been determined in this fashion will be
played off one against the otherand when necessary kept
apart with military force.
Imperialist interests
There are press reports in circulation which state that the
US is checking the possibility of sending peacekeeping troops
to Cyprus. An analysis of the Cyprus situation in the Asia
Times states: Now Washington wants to upgrade its half-century
intelligence presence on the island into a full-fledged army base
whenand ifthe Greek and Turkish Cypriot sides agree
on reunification. The Pentagon might begin by establishing a bare-bones
military presence on the eastern Mediterranean island, following
the possible reunification of the divided country, according to
strategic analysts...
Using Cyprus as a logistics base would allow the Pentagon
more flexibility in planning interventions in the Middle East
and give it firmer control over the oil-rich regions of the Middle
East, North Africa and the Caspian Sea, especially at a time when
Libyas rehabilitation within the international community
is gathering momentum. In addition, it would allow easier supervision
of regional sea routes and complement the US presence in Djibouti
that guards the southern access point to the Suez Canal, by establishing
a presence near the canals northern exit.
An additional factor is that the northern extremity of Cyprus
is only 70 kilometres from the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhanthe
final destination of a US-backed pipeline which begins in Baku
on the shores of the Caspian Sea.
Two pieces of land in CyprusAkrotiri and Dhekaliahave
for some time served as British military bases and are in fact
under British sovereignty. Akrotiri is one of the biggest British
airbases in the world and US intelligence services have been active
in Cyprus for decades. From Cyprus the CIA coordinates its activities
in Africa and the Middle East and conducts surveillance of Arab
radio transmissions.
The Annan Plan not only involves the retention of the British
bases, but also preserves the status of Great Britain, the former
colonial master of the island, as guarantor power
alongside Greece and Turkey. A reduction of the Turkish and Greek
armies is planned that will mean, in the long term, that the only
significant military presence on the island will be American and
British.
It is these two countries which bear the main historic responsibility
for the sufferings endured by the Turkish and Greek communities.
The British colonial authority on the island reacted to the
struggle for independence in the 1950s by deliberately recruiting
Turkish Cypriots as reserve police and then employing them against
their Greek compatriots. When the Turk nationalist TMT, which
had been built up by the Turkish mainland intelligence service,
began attacking Greek Cypriots, the British turned a blind eye.
The British then went on to tolerate the TMT as it extended its
campaign to systematically terrorising the Turkish working class,
murdering the leaders of the workers movement and intimidating
its membersabove all, to prevent all attempts to establish
solidarity with Greek workers.
The colonial power was assisted in this respect by the policies
of the Stalinist AKEL, which was the biggest single party at that
time in Cypriot political life and dominated the trade union movement.
Taking up the nationalist battle cry Enosis (unity
with Greece), the AKEL even went so far as to collaborate with
the bastion of reaction on the islandthe Orthodox Church.
The most determined protagonist of Enosis was the EOKA, led
by Georgios Grivas, a fanatically anticommunist and nationalist
army officer who undertook a terrorist campaign against the British,
the Greek left and Turkish Cypriots. On the basis of its anticommunism
the EOKA received protection and assistance from the US. Until
1967 Washington favoured a solution on the basis of
Enosis, at the same time allowing Turkey to get a military base
on the island. Later, as the strategic value of Turkey grew, it
was assured a more extensive role.
It is regarded as highly likely (a number of authors have assembled
considerable relevant material) that the right-wing putsch in
1974 (the year of the islands division), which briefly brought
EOKA gangster Nikos Sampson to power, and the subsequent invasion
by Turkish troops, received the green light from Washington. In
any event, the result was entirely in the interests of the US
and Britain: a division of the island between right-wing, chauvinist
and anticommunist forces, who were nevertheless pro-Western and
prepared to allow effective control to remain in the hands of
the two NATO countries.
Cyprus can be free, united and a part of Europe only when working
people overcome religious and ethnic barriers, and according to
the original ideals of the Cypriot workers movement join together
and fight for a socialist Cyprus as part of the United Socialist
States of Europe. The Annan Plan must be rejected with a clear
no vote in the referendum. At the same time, working
people must reject all forms of Greek and Turkish chauvinism and
demand that all foreign troops be withdrawn from the island and
Western military bases closed.
See Also:
Change of government following
elections in North Cyprus
[13 January 2004]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |