Cyprus: Annan Plan
Lord Faulkner of Worcester:
My Lords, I am sure that the House is grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis of Drumglass, for initiating this debate and giving us the opportunity to debate this important issue. I am afraid though that I disagree with, I think, everything he said. I certainly do not share his view about the origins of the present impasse in Cyprus.
I first visited Cyprus early in 1975, less than six months after the attempted Greek coup d'état and the subsequent Turkish invasion. I vividly remember the sight of the burnt out cars on the driveway to the presidential palace in Nicosia and the bullet holes on the building. But never in my most pessimistic moments would I have believed that the island would still be divided 31 years later. Then, it always seemed more likely that a solution would be found to the Cyprus question than, for example, that the Berlin Wall would come down or that apartheid would be replaced by majority rule in South Africa.
Less surprising is the fact that the conspiracy theorists are now at work on who was responsible for the tragedy of 1974. We may know one day how much Henry Kissinger encouraged a Turkish invasion and how seriously the British government contemplated sending 12,000 troops to help restore President Makarios.
But none of that is really relevant to resolving the issues of today. Like many, I hoped that a combination of Cyprus's accession to the EU and the attempts by Kofi Annan to broker an agreement between all parties would have led to a settlement which would have reunited the island. But as we know, 76 per cent of Greek Cypriots last year voted "No" in a referendum on the UN plan. There is a very strong feeling on the island that in producing a plan which he could sell to the Turkish Cypriots, Mr Annan lost sight of the need to carry the Greek Cypriot majority with him.
I have read the account of the briefing given by Sir Kieran Prendergast to the Security Council on 22 June, following his recent visits to Cyprus, Greece and Turkey to discuss the future of the Secretary-General's mission of good offices in Cyprus. It is interesting that he says in his statement,
"the highest priority concerns which led Greek Cypriots to vote the way they did would most certainly have to be addressed in any future process based on the United Nations plan—and the Greek Cypriot electorate must have confidence that that would be borne in mind in a renewed process".
Given the involvement of western intelligence in this whole matter, particularly in the United States, it is a pity that the mood in Cyprus was not better judged before the referendum. It would have helped, for example, if Turkey had been made to recognise the Republic of Cyprus as an essential element in that process.
As recently as last Wednesday, the EU Enlargement Commissioner, the Finnish representative Olli Rehn, said that if the negotiations with Turkey over EU membership were to make progress, it has to normalise bilateral relations with all EU member states, including opening Turkey's ports and airports to Cyprus.
Fundamental to all this are the human rights issues, particularly the Loizidou case and the subsequent outcome of the European Court of Human Rights judgment of 2001. The court's opinion was that Turkey has violated the human rights of Greek Cypriots residing in the government-controlled area of the republic, including the rights of property, the right to a home, the right to life and the right to personal freedoms of the Greek Cypriot missing persons.
The court ruled that the Government of the Republic of Cyprus are the sole legitimate government of the country, that the "TRNC" is not a state under international law and is therefore illegal, that the local administration in Northern Cyprus survives by virtue of Turkish military support, that Turkey, which has, "effective overall control over Northern Cyprus", is responsible for securing all human rights under the conventions and protocols she has ratified, and that violations of such rights by her own soldiers or officials, or by the local administration, are imputable to her.
Of course we have to remember that the population of northern Cyprus is very different today from what it was before the Turks invaded in 1974. Then there were about 118,000 Turkish Cypriots. By 2001 that figure had fallen to 87,600 and it is likely to have fallen further since. But the gaps have been more than made up by settlers from mainland Turkey, reckoned to total 160,000, and 35,000 Turkish troops. Given these facts, it is hard to see what obligations Her Majesty's Government have to restore human rights to the citizens of the so-called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.
But as the European Court has ruled, there are some very serious human rights issues in Cyprus, though they are rather different from those described by the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis. I believe that our Government should strengthen their warnings to British citizens who are contemplating the buying of property in the Turkish-occupied part of the island. The outcome of the European Court cases should leave no one in any doubt that Greek Cypriots who lost their property as a consequence of the Turkish invasion are entitled to compensation if they can prove their title. Just last Monday, the Guardian newspaper reported the case of Mr and Mrs Orams from East Sussex, who lost their appeal to a court order to demolish their villa situated a few miles west of Kyrenia, to pay rent for the time they lived there, and to return the plot to Mr Meletis Apostolides, who was able to produce the title deeds some 30 years after he fled from the north of Cyprus, as the Turks invaded.
With Cyprus now in the European Union, the case could be transferred to a British court and this unfortunate British couple could then find themselves losing their home in Hove, Sussex, if they have not by then complied with the court order. The newspaper also reported that there are, "hundreds of other Greek Cypriots who have filed petitions with local courts to reclaim properties".
This situation will undoubtedly get worse if the present property boom in northern Cyprus continues, particularly if the developers are so unconcerned about the ownership of the land they are selling.
The Turkish Cypriot daily, Yeni Duzen, reported on 26 May this year that a building contractor called Kutsal Tokatlioglu, who is wanted by Interpol and has had a European arrest warrant issued against him, is building villas in the occupied Klepini village and has no intention of stopping. I was not surprised to read in the Cyprus Mail of 8 June that Kofi Annan is much exercised by the rise in property claims. I am sure that we all are. But it is very hard to argue with the view of the Cyprus Government that it is, "the right of every individual to claim his own property. It is safeguarded by international conventions".
These property issues are of course complicated by the fact that a number of the developers who are flogging properties to unsuspecting British residents are British criminals who are holed up in Turkish-occupied Cyprus and benefiting from the absence of extradition arrangements.
Two years ago the Economist published an article saying that there was to be more co-operation between the British and Turkish Cypriot police forces over extradition. When she replies, perhaps my noble friend the Minister could say whether Her Majesty's Government are satisfied that these improvements have taken place.
For example, what has happened to Mr Stanley Rankin, wanted on money-laundering charges and who was charged with being in possession of three million forged French francs, but ran to Northern Cyprus before he could face trial, and Mr Garry Robb, charged with conspiracy to supply drugs? I understand that Mr Robb is one of the owners of AGA Development Limited, which the BBC described in April as engaged in the biggest building project in the north, an entire village at Arapkoy, 10 miles east of Kyrenia between the coast and the mountains.
And what, indeed, of Asil Nadir, of Polly Peck fame, who was reported in the Guardian on 3 September 2003 as being "ready to give himself up" and to return from Northern Cyprus to face the music on charges alleging theft of £34 million? What has happened to him? Why has he not come back?
But back to the main political issue—I conclude with this—what should happen now? Everyone accepts—and Sir Kieran Prendergast said this again the other day—that the persistence of the status quo on the island is unacceptable. The solution surely lies in a bizonal, bicommunal federation which reunifies the country socially, economically and politically. Neither community should be in a position to impose its will on the other. Those are the words of the president of the Republic of Cyprus, Tassas Papadopoulos, speaking at a trade fair as recently as 19 May.
"Outsiders can help, but it is the parties who must summon the vision, courage and political will needed to make a settlement, with all that implies by way of compromise. Leaders have to lead, not just follow their supporters".
© Lords Hansard 5 July 2005