From Dimitri Konstantakopoulos, last month:
Since April 2016, US neoconservatives have been trying to change the status of Cyprus. It is for them both (1) to reunite the island (2) to deprive it of its army (3) but also to deploy the Turkish army under cover of NATO. The inevitable Victoria Nuland, who should have become Secretary of State if Hillary Clinton had been elected president, is maneuvering. This plan is supposed to tie Turkey to NATO and prevent its rapprochement with Russia…
The type of settlement Mrs. Nuland wants to impose on Cyprus is a new version of the Annan Plan, rejected by the overwhelming majority of Cypriots during the 2004 referendum, in spite of enormous pressure they had suffered and a real terror campaign against them, warning the day of Doom would come on the aftermath of a No vote. The Annan Plan is violating all essential provisions of European, International and Constitutional Law, including the UN Charter. In the light of its provisions, it represents the most comprehensive effort undertaken, since the defeat of Nazism, in 1945, to impose a totalitarian system in any western country.
The Annan plan is instituting a kind of Frankestein state in Cyprus, where, among other things, the rule of majority (democracy) will be formally abolished, where there will be permanent vetos of the two Cypriot communities in every level of decision making and in all branches of power (executive, legislative, judicial), and, in the very probable case that system would be brought to an impasse, foreign judges will decide everything. In reality, the new “state” will be governed by foreign judges, concentrating upon themselves, three centuries after Montesqieu, all powers…
The only way to do what she wants, in order to circumvent the provision for a referendum, is to have the President of Cyprus Mr. Anastasiades and the leader of Turkish Cypriots Mr. Akinci sign all that, or as much as they can of that. Then, Mr. Tsipras, Mr. Erdogan and Mrs May will endorse them and they will do something else also, legalize the Turkish military presence inside the European Union for some indefinite, as we write period. Mr. Juncker plans also to be there to applaud all that in the name of the European Union. The State Department has already warned the US Congress to be ready to adopt bills on Cyprus and the Commission altered all its programs for January 12…
No international conference and not even the President of Cyprus himself (or, for that matter, the Greek PM) has any right to sign agreements that infringe on the sovereignty of the Cypriot state (like for instance legalizing the Turkish military presence on the island, when numerous UN resolutions ask for the immediate withdrawal of Turkish forces, which invaded the island in 1974). Even more, nobody, including the President of Cyprus, has the right to change the constitutional structure of his state, much more, abolish it altogether! If they do it, it would be a coup d’Etat, in the strict legal sense of the word, that is a serious breach of the constitutional order of the Republic of Cyprus and, as this Republic is also a full member of the European Union, of the Treaties of the EU.
From The Guardian on January 12th:
The UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, hailed progress in the talks but cautioned against hopes of a “quick fix”. He trumpeted “enormous progress” since the two Cypriot leaders embarked on issues like territory, property and relations with the European Union, but said “we need to find a number of instruments” when it comes to security options.
From Kakaouskia at The Saker, Monday:
What is being proposed is upon agreement for a solution a big percentage of Turkish troops (50%+) be repatriated to Turkey and the rest to gradually leave within 5 years. Recent visits by Victoria Nuland probably have something to do with this issue. While guarantees by NATO will not be easily accepted, both for ideological reasons plus the oxymoron of removing Turkey as a guarantor and bringing it back as a NATO member, a formula can be found for “neutral” NATO members like Germany to help with the security. Basically, the US is trying to avoid Russia establishing yet another base in the Mediterranean.
Part I focuses on Cypriot history and Part II on recent events.
From Stavros Hadjiyiannis in the comments:
Moreover, the last thing that Russia would like to see in Cyprus right now, is a solution that would give Turkey preeminence in Cyprus. Russia is not in the business of making Turkey more powerful. Russia wants Turkey weakened and contained and also wants to maintain her interests in the Greek part of Cyprus, which are considerable. The reason why Nuland (and even the EU) lobbied so hard (and are still lobbying, well, not Nuland anymore) for a solution to the Cyprus problem is because this would drastically reduce any Russian influence over the island and foreclose over any possibility for this influence to increase in the future. I can easily envision Russia being the main external influence over the island well before 2030. In matter of fact, as soon as the EU inevitably implodes, the Greek part of Cyprus will immediately pass under Russia’s influence and protection.
From Sir Humphrey Appleby in the comments:
The British were always terrified of the prospect that a unified and independent Cypriot government would give the boot to their TWO mliitary bases (Akrotiri, Dekeleia). Even worse, Cyprus becoming part of Greece? With 82% Greeks, some willing to be sent to the gallows by the British for the dream of union (Enosis), like the 19-yeal old Evagoras Pallikaridis, the British must have come to the speedy conclusion that they could only achieve their goals by weaponising the 18% Turkish minority to provoke a partition. My… interlocutor puts it best here: https://youtu.be/sYjk84yoUNE?t=750.
And such a partitioned state has ever since been the goal, steadfastly pursued by the “Anan plan”. What the author fails to mention is that a whopping 76% rejected the Anan plan which, if successful, would have Cypriot supreme court cases being judged by a Greek, a Turkish and… Bangladeshian, Nigerian and Japanese judges, and in which citizens would not settle freely but based on their ethnicity. The author also fails to mention the media frenzy and vilification that took place in Greece and Cyprus AGAINST the “No” proponents on the MSM media and by major parties.