CYPRUS WILL U.N. RESOLUTION LEAD TO SETTLEMENT ON ISLAND?

Press, Volume CV, Issue 30977, 5 February 1966, Page 14

CYPRUS WILL U.N. RESOLUTION LEAD TO SETTLEMENT ON ISLAND?

IBf the Nicosia correspondent of the "Financial Times / (Reprinted from the "Financial Timet” bp arranpement

President Makarios’ present visit to London though cribed as a private one—takes an added significance fro Greek later he is due to fly to Athens. There he will have talks wjth the Greek Government on the future course of the CjT>rus question. TMs meeting may determine whether there is any prospect of the dui in the foreseeable future—or whether it can be written off as one oi r institutionalised and insoluble problems of our time.

The pivotal fact in the new phase of the Cyprus question is the resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly a few days before Christmas. This was a patent win for the Greeks—but for the Makarios Government rather than for Athens. It recognised Cyprus as an equal member of the U.N. “entitled to full sovereignty and complete independence without any foreign intervention or interference,” and went on to call upon all states to refrain from intervening in its affairs. In its preamble it also took note of the report submitted by the U.N. mediator, Mr Galo Plaza—a document which, it is generally agreed, substantially endorsed the Greek Cypriot’s position. The resolution was a disappointment for the Turks and a happy Christmas present for President Makarios.

Critical Vote At the critical vote, 54 countries abstained (including nearly all the Western powers and all the Soviet bloc); 10 were absent; one declared itself technically “nonparticipating;” and five voted against (including the United States). This left 47 countries in favour of the resolution, 25 of them African, and all of them non-aligned; undoubtedy support for Makarios was equated in their minds with some kind of protest against “Western imperialism.”

Not surprisingly, the Cyprus Government has acclaimed the event as a great victory, and as some sort of mandate from world opinion. Although the resolution has no legal force, the scales have been now subtly tipped in Makarios’s favour. The reaction in Ankara has been one of fury and frustration. The Turkish Government has officially denounced and rejected the resolution, as invalid. Angry outbursts have followed against Western countries who abstained, notably Britain, which is still legally a guarantor of the 1960 Constitution and treaties. Paradoxically, the United States—the only Western country to support the Turks —has been equally under attack, because it has now been officially revealed that the Americans intervened in 1964 to prevent Turkey

launching an invasion of the island. , . , Nevertheless, behind the scenes, there are signs that the Turkish Government is coldly and realistically reappraising the situation. (“Reappraisal” is the keyword in Ankara at the moment.) Thus using Dr. Kutchuk. the Turkish Cypriot leader as a mouthpiece, a significant statement was put out about 10 days ago which has aroused surprisingly little attention in the world Press. Conference Proposed Dr. Kutchuk proposed an immediate round-table conference on Cyprus between all the interested parties—“without any pre-condition.” This could be held with or without British participation, he said, as Britain had already declared she would acquiesce in any settlement acceptable to the other parties. This suggestion marks an interesting shift in the Turkish position on two counts. There was no reference to prior direct talks between Greece and Turkey, which Ankara had always previously demanded. Secondly, there was no insistence that the basis for such a conference must be the 1960 Constitution and treaties which, in the Turkish view, are still legally valid and operative. Within three days, however, President Makarios rejected the Turkish move. The position he is adopting is a predictable one. In his view, any talks must be based on the U.N. resolution, and Dr. Kutchuk’s proposal is simply a manoeuvre to side-step the implementation of the General Assembly’s verdict Further, the Archbishop appears to be adamant in his refusal to talk to the Ankara Government (which he does not regard as a party to the dispute). The attitude of the Greek Government is, however, much more equivocal or, more positively, conciliatory; and it is this note of flexibility vis-a-vis Ankara, detectable in recent pronouncements, that gives the meeting between the Archbishop and the Greek Prime Minister, Mr Stephanopoulos, added importance. The Greek Government does not see the U.N. resolution in the same roseate light as the Arch-bishop—-for the obvious reason that the U.N. vote was essentially for an independent Cyprus, not for Enosis. "Aim-twisting” For the same reason, Athens is not so enthusiastic about Mr Plaza’s mediation report, which the Cyprus Government Inevitably will want to exploit to the full in any discussions. In short, the Greek Government will probably be only too pleased if, by a little arm-twisting,

they can induce President Makarios to agree to talks with the Turkish Government But can they? This is the point on which the Cyprus question now hinges. Meanwhile, the Turks have gained one minor point. Mr Plaza, whose mediation report so aroused their wrath, has formally resigned. A proposal put forward by Athens that the U.N. Secretary-General U Thant, should himself assume the functions of Cyprus mediator possibly appointing a special assistant to carry out the bulk of the day-to-day work—has so far cut little Ice. To find, at this stage, another mediator on whom both Ankara and Makarios will agree, may be well-nigh impossible. So, for the moment, as diplomats, scurry hither and thither, Cyprus hovers between peace and renewed violence, with 5000 U.N. troops still holding the ring between the two implacable communities. In the Greek sectors the economy is booming. In the Turkish enclaves, poverty is rampant, but the Turks would rather live that way than be ruled by the Greeks. At least, for the moment, there is no bloodshed.