I returned from a consulting trip to
Istanbul this evening to read what must be one of the worse articles ever
published in the Financial Times.
My critique of the article, Cyprus
juggles EU and Russian support, is based purely on facts, and I hope it
will be interpreted by the readers of this blog as such.
The article makes its bias clear from the
first two paragraphs:
If European
leaders hoped Cyprus would use its turn at the helm of the EU’s rotating
presidency to signal a break from its longtime benefactors in Moscow, the country’s
Russian-educated communist president made clear on Thursday they would be
disappointed.
A week after
becoming the fifth eurozone country to
seek a bailout from Brussels, Demetris Christofias said his
government would continue to seek rescue loans from the Kremlin – in essence,
playing one potential creditor off the other.
While Cyprus has requested European Union
support, no offer has been made yet. A “Troika” evaluation mission to Nicosia
started this week, but the complete package will not be defined for some weeks
to come.
Given that neither Russia nor the Troika
are “bidding” to lend money to Cyprus, I fail to see how this amounts to
playing one creditor off against the other.
Cyprus is following multiple courses of
action to redress its urgent financial problems, which mainly involve bank
recapitalisation. As a sovereign country, it has every right and indeed the
responsibility to do so.
The German bilateral relationship with
Russia is far stronger in terms of trade, investment and gas (see for instance former Chancellor Gerhard
Schroder’s chairmanship of North Stream). If we apply the author’s logic to
Germany, should we understand that Germany too needs to separate itself from
“longtime benefactors in Moscow?”
It’s also worthwhile noting that there are
far more Cypriots studying and working in the UK than in Russia, and far more
British citizens living and visiting Cyprus each year than Russians. Britain
maintains two
sovereign military bases in the Republic of Cyprus with 3,500 troops
stationed there. I therefore have to question the systematic attempt to
demonize Russia in this article, or for that matter, the Cypriot relationship
with Russia.
The author also misstates the facts of Cyprus’s
relationship with Turkey:
Cyprus
has not only blocked progress on Turkey’s membership of the EU but it has
prevented the EU from working more closely with Nato to co-ordinate European
defence policies.
This statement is both factually wrong and
misleading:
· It is wrong in that the Cypriot
veto over Turkey’s membership in the European Defence Agency has prompted Turkey’s veto
of EU coordination with NATO. Cyprus is not blocking EU coordination with
NATO—Turkey is. This is an elementary fact which should have been checked prior
to publication.
· It is misleading because it
fails to mention that via the Ankara
Declaration, Turkey neither recognises the Republic of Cyprus, nor has it
opened its ports and airports to Cypriot ships or airplanes. This is what has
prompted Cyprus to veto Turkish membership in the EDA, but has also prompted
the European Union to freeze negotiations on 8 chapters of the Acquis
communautaire.
· It fails to include the fact
that Nicholas Sarkozy
and Angela Merkel
have both called for an alternative membership status for Turkey, and that this
too has played a negative political role in Turkey’s EU accession process.
The German Foreign Ministry does a far
better job of explaining the current
status of Turkey’s accession negotiations:
When a large number of Central and
Eastern European countries joined the EU in 2004, it became necessary to
include them in the EU-Turkish customs union. To that end, the Ankara Protocol,
an additional protocol to the Ankara Agreement, was signed on 29 July
2005. Turkey issued a declaration expressing its continuing non-recognition of
the Republic of Cyprus and explicitly excluding Cyprus from the customs union.
The European Union issued a counter-declaration rejecting this interpretation
and thus re establishing the obligation to include the Republic of Cyprus
without exception. Turkey is nonetheless still failing to uphold the free
movement of goods created within the customs union in the form of free access
to Turkish territory for Cypriot ships, aircraft and heavy goods vehicles. The
Council of the European Union has repeatedly criticized this treaty violation,
deciding in December 2006 on a partial suspension of accession negotiations.
Until the Cyprus conflict is resolved and Turkey implements the Ankara Protocol
without discrimination, eight chapters in the negotiations will remain unopened
and no chapter will be closed. Because of the continuing lack of progress on
the implementation of the Ankara Protocol, the Council has renewed this
decision annually since 2006.
In reference to President Christofias’
comments on Turkey, it fails to mention that these occur in the backdrop of Turkish
threats against Cypriot oil and gas exploration or the Turkish intention to
freeze
relations with the EU over the Cypriot presidency.
I bring up these facts solely to illustrate
the full picture—not to justify the political decisions on any side which has
led Turkey and Cyprus into this regrettable situation.
I honestly have to question how an article
with such visible bias, and with such a one-sided view of the situation, can be
published in the Financial Times, particularly coming at the beginning of the
Cypriot EU Presidency.
I've had the enormous privilege of working over the years in all three countries: Greece, Cyprus, and Turkey. Through my work, I've interacted with thousands of business owners and managers in this time, as well as journalists, NGO members, government officials, and many others.
Like many others, I believe that Greece,
Turkey and Cyprus have more to gain from working together constructively and peacefully
rather than engendering a permanent state of military and political aggression. Geographic reality, together with our shared culture and our tremendous economic synergies and
potential should make that obvious to anyone.
What should also be obvious are that while
there are serious problems on all sides of the political equation,
well-meaning partners could solve these if we would put aside the vested
interests, stereotypes, political posturing and the bitter memories of the
past, and concentrate on our shared—and inevitable—future.
This would require a rational, post-nationalistic
approach to policy, which I believe citizens in all three countries are ready
for, and indeed would welcome. I have particular hopes that the positive
impacts of globalisation and mobility, and the common interests of younger generations will
one day make this vision a reality.
Unfortunately, articles like this do more
to encourage misconceptions and hostility than to present an accurate and
objective picture of current affairs.
A list of sources follows for anyone
interested in a more complete picture of the political situation between Cyprus
and Turkey.
© Philip Ammerman, 2012
Turkey rejects
EU Cyprus Proposals (Hurriyet Daily News)
Between
the European Union and NATO, Many Walls (New York Times)
EU
Enlargement: Turkey. (Germany Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
European Union
Accession: A Status Report on Turkey’s Accession Process. (US Congressional
Research Service)
Turkey not fit for EU
accession: Sarkozy. (Deutsche Welle)
Merkel calls for petition
against EU Membership (Deutsche Welle)
Nord Stream AG
(Wikipedia)
Cyprus,
Turkey spar over gas drilling (Reuters)