The Annan Plan was co-authored by the UN Secretary General and EU. It was supposed to facilitate Cyprus membership to EU. It proved to be a deadlock. The refusal of the Greek Cypriots put an end to the Plan.

The result of the referenda left both the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots in a stronger position than before. The Greek Cypriots joined the EU. The Turkish Cypriots could not join the EU, but have gained the status of “Constituent State”, if not by the defunct Annan Plan, surely by having the right to vote in the referendum.

Today the question is how can the strength of the Turkish Cypriots could be translated into practice? The relevant institutions are the UN and the EU. They both have to take measures to end the long-standing isolation of the Turkish Cypriots. The UN Security Council must take a decision allowing the UN system and member countries to end the restrictive measures against them.

Let us consider the positions of the two parties as they might affect any future Security Council resolution on the matter.

First, the Turkish Cypriot positive vote in the referendum. The Council should remember that, the Turkish Cypriots had suffered for 40 years because of the 4 March 1964 resolution of the Security Council which afforded the Greek Cypriots to pose as the Government of Cyprus. The Council should also remember, it was the first time during this referendum, that the Turkish Cypriots were given the opportunity to decide on any major issue, such as membership in the European Union. The Turkish Cypriots, by using their vote, wanted also to end the Cyprus conflict started in 1963. In that way they have given a major boost to the Good-Offices Mission of the Secretary General.

Second, the Greek Cypriot negative vote in the referendum. The Security Council should take cognizance of the fact that, despite 40 years of UN endeavours, the Greek Cypriots never wavered from their goal of Enosis, the Union of Cyprus with Greece. Over the years, the Security Council spoke of the equal status of the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots and finally endorsed the Annan Plan; but to no avail. Today, the Security Council has the duty to tell them that the World Body clearly understood this manoeuvre and that it would not be a party to the tactics used by the Greek Cypriots.

In the face of this new situation, the past endeavours of the Secretary General should have their bearing on any new Council Resolution. Among other things, the assertion made by Mr. Annan on 12 September 2000 that “each represents its side –and no one else” should be the basic premise of any new pronouncement by the Security Council.

The second actor who had unfortunately weakened Greek Cypriot incentive to compromise in Cyprus negotiations since 1995 is the European Union. EU owes a great debt to the Turkish Cypriots.

EU should make arrangements to end the embargo by member countries against the Turkish Cypriots in the field of trade, tourism, transportation, etc…

The third actor who is free to act regardless of the positions of the UN or EU on this matter is the United States. US can improvise on a vast variety of subjects to end the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots.