|
In
a previous article, we argued that the urgency of the UN's bargaining over
Cyprus derived more from symbolic factors than anything intrinsic to the
situation itself: "...In this age of democracy, freedom and human rights, ugly
realities of ethnic discord such as Cyprus represents cannot be tolerated."
Or, the article continued, "...they can, but only in non-unionized (and possibly non-unionizable) places like the Balkans. It is decidedly not meet for an EU country to join the fold with
its internal antagonisms visibly demarcated. Europe prefers subtler forms of
intolerance. After all, neo-Nazi extremism percolates, but under the surface in
Germany and other central European countries, and xenophobic right-wing
politicians everywhere from France to Austria to the Netherlands are censured by
the benevolent state-crafters of the Union. The paradox of nationalist discord
flourishing in free Europe is an embarrassment, and so is pushed underground,
with who knows what long-term effects."
As April begins, outside parties- the EU, UN and America- are putting
tremendous pressure on both sides to pass the agreement. "The hour is late but
the cause is urgent,"
stated UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the negotiating teams assembled at
Switzerland's Buergenstock resort, according to the Associated Press. Annan, the
main author of the plan, announced a deadline of April 24 by which referendums
must be held by the island's populations.
While all negotiated settlements must involve compromises, the Greek side
believes it is being asked to give far more than it will receive. Under the
Annan plan, a very weak central government presiding over 2 autonomous states is
envisioned. Thus would be recognized, with only a few cosmetic changes, the
'Turkish Republic of North Cyprus' that no country on earth currently
recognizes, owing to the violent way in which it was formed.
Further, the 220-page plan will only allow the return of a "proportion" of
Greek Cypriots forced from their homes in the north in 1974, while allowing the
successive waves of Turkish settlers from the mainland to stay. The Greeks want
all of their displaced population to be able to return, and the impoverished
settlers forced onto Cyprus by the Turkish government to go home. The Annan plan
also will prevent Greeks from buying land in the north for at least 15 years- by
which time most will probably be gone.
Besides, the major sticking point- the banishment of Turkish armed forces
that have occupied the northern third of the island since 1974- would be
deferred until at least 2018. So, in return for giving up considerable political
power, recognizing the north, tolerating a Turkish military presence and sharing
in the riches of a prosperous economy and EU membership, the Greeks would get-
nothing. In the end, it is very hard to see how the Annan plan is in any way a
compromise.
Says the AP, "...Greek Cypriots know that -- whatever the outcome of the vote
-- they will join the European Union on May 1 and get all the benefits that
entails. Their standard of living is five times that of the Turkish Cypriots,
and reunification would require them to pour money into the impoverished north."
Reuters yesterday spoke of Greek PM Costas Karamanlis's pessimism regarding the
plan: "'...we don't want to impose a solution ... but the (revised) plan is
basically the main plan with only some minor changes,' Karamanlis said. 'The
final judgment rests with the Cypriot people.'"
Adds Reuters, "...Greece's main objections focus on the plan's provisions for
Turkish and Greek troops to remain on the island at least until 2018 and on
transitional exemptions from basic EU laws that would limit rights of Greek
Cypriots in the Turkish north." Thrilling conditions indeed.
In 2004, only the most untrusting of Turks imagine that their population is
in any real danger from Greek military aggression. Things have changed too much,
and the European Union has a far greater say over Greek foreign policy than it
did 30 years ago. Besides, Greek-Turkish bilateral relations have improved
considerably since 1997, when the two countries' militaries were facing off
because of Turkish provocations in the east Aegean. The Greek-expedited capture of
wanted Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan in 1998, and especially the mutual aid
given during the 1999 Izmit and Athens earthquakes, led to an unprecedented
spirit of solidarity between the two Mediterranean neighbors. After the
devastating quakes, Greece dropped its veto on Turkey's applying to join the EU,
and the rapprochement was made more complete still.
The real impasse over the military pullout derives not from any real foreign
policy breakdown or fear of war, therefore, but rather from associate domestic
concerns. The Turkish army has for years enjoyed popularity over its resolute
stance in the emotive issue of Cyprus. To pull out now would mean a considerable
loss of face. And, since the army is also the de facto guarantor of Turkey's
secular republic, there are perhaps legitimate concerns that any depreciation of
the army's political power could make it easier for the challenging of that
secular status by usurpers.
Yet, as we said, symbolic reasons lay behind the forced urgency of the negotiations. And we
should not forget personal ambition; as the AP reports, "solving" the Cyprus problem "...would represent a huge feather in Annan's cap if he could pull it off."
That said, one must question the wisdom of forcing a solution on opposing
parties merely for the attainment of personal luster and to symbolically shore up the validity of the United Nations as a force for Good. The UN (and the EU as well) is in fact an enormously corrupt and wasteful organization, crippled by
bureaucratic bloat and non-accountability, infiltrated by mercenaries from
private military companies re-suited with peacekeepers' badges, and infected
with all the same financial scandals and sexcapades with interns common to any
other grand international organization or government.
"Diplomats from foreign states who are sent to work at the UN understand it
as their chance for party time in New York," charges one former staffer, who
gave us specific names of currently high-ranking officials (US and other) once
legendary for their lasciviousness and corruption while at the UN. And the cases
of low-level corruption, appropriations fraud, theft, etc. in 'the field' are
far too numerous to mention. At the end of the day, one has to wonder whether
sanctifying this sorry lot by forcing an agreement on the disgruntled people of
Cyprus is either justified or a wise thing to do. It may actually cause a
resurgence of the same tensions it is allegedly meant to end once and for all.
|
|