CUMHURIYET- Columnist Orhan Bursali comments on the Cyprus problem and possible solutions to it. A summary of his column is as follows:
When Turkey’s foreign problems are discussed, our tendency towards polarization always seems to take precedence. We look down on discussing various opinions and producing solutions in Turkey’s favor. We love conflicts too much. The Cyprus problem is a typical example of this. Recently our TRT network spoke to a retired major general. He started to talk not as the specialist of a think-tank, but as a common propagandist. He used distortion and exaggeration to paint United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s plan as being in Turkey’s disadvantage. Then he came to his conclusion: ‘If Annan’s plan includes proposals appropriate to most of Turkey’s wishes, this is the result of 28 years of insistent policies. Then our policy has been successful, and so we should continue it.” How do you like this retired soldier’s point of view? He’s suggesting a policy of deadlock instead of producing opinions by considering the current strategic situation inn light of Turkey’s best interests. Turkey might have been right to steadfastly oppose policies at the hands of Greeks and Greek Cypriots which aimed to corner Turkey in the international arena. The policy of dividing Cyprus is based on this policy. We have paid the price for this for 28 years.
However, things have changed now. A period of cooperation, not conflict, has begun. Conflict brings hazards and cooperation brings benefits. We should solve our country’s problems with other countries as much as we can, steer clear of conflict and put Turkey into circles of cooperation. Is it possible to defend policies followed for 28 years for 28 more years and could these policies possibly benefit Turkey and Cyprus? Framing the issue in terms of ‘gaining territory’ and the ‘benefits’ of gaining territory is no longer valid. Now the world is directed at improving things through cooperation. Are we able to gain the greatest share of economic, cultural and social benefit and make plans to create the highest value for our nation’s welfare? Can we show the way to do this? Strategy specialists should make this their first priority.
I wonder if the aim of the Cyprus talks is to use tactics directed at gaining the maximum benefit. Or are they aiming at protecting the status quo and a policy of division by starting negotiations from a hard-line pretext stance, so as to say, ‘They aren’t addressing our wishes.’ Those who would admit Annan’s plan without any reservations are at the other extreme. Obviously changes in the Turkish Cypriots’ favor should be pushed. The maps joining the two nations might not be feasible. It would be beneficial if this joining took place over a long period. It would be a much more realistic attitude to wait for the problems to be resolved by themselves as cooperation in Cyprus develops and the benefits of cooperation start to be seen. What’s more, Annan’s plan provides Turks with great rights of political sovereignty. It should be our chief goal to strengthen this agreement with a better one and to usher in a new period of partnership.
SOURCE: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PRESS AND INFORMATION