Now there’s another problem! Because I wrote positively about the White House meeting, the clever clogs are asking if I noticed that Biden spoke about a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation (BBF) solution. They say I should be negative since I oppose BBF. Oh God, give me strength!
Perhaps they thought I was expecting the Americans to change their policy and decide that BBF would formalise partition and destroy the Greek Cypriots’ only support – the Republic of Cyprus. How naive!
If there were any chance they’d change their Cyprus policy, they’d be more likely to support Turkey’s positions, not ours. And certainly not to support a unitary state, for instance. But there was no possibility they’d invite the President of the Republic of Cyprus to the White House only for the US President to advocate a two-state solution. He spoke about the solution outlined in Security Council resolutions, of which the US is a permanent member.
What matters isn’t that he referenced a BBF solution, though in the current climate that’s satisfactory for our side since Washington, despite being Ankara’s close ally, rejects Turkey’s preferred solution. More significant is that Biden, reading from the State Department’s prepared text, avoided mentioning Turkey or occupation.
He spoke of “Cyprus’s artificial division“, though he said he remembers well “that sad day” (we suspect he meant the invasion, but it’s not certain) as it was during his first year as Senator. The White House’s official statement after the meeting followed the same line: “Recognising 50 years of the island’s division, President Biden reiterated his support for a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation…”
“Division of the island” isn’t a satisfactory phrase when discussing invasion, occupation, and a “sad day”. But given the Cyprus issue’s current state (or phase, if you prefer), all this diplomatic hypocrisy is overshadowed, almost dissolved, by the very fact of the White House meeting. This multiplies the reality that the Republic of Cyprus, far from being defunct, is a strengthened state with a significant role in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Neither the illusion that Cyprus could replace Turkey in serving American interests, nor the idea that these developing relations would make America twist Turkey’s arm to liberate Cyprus, fits our concerns. But we shouldn’t dismiss this development with the superficiality we’ve witnessed these past days.
It’s significant, even theoretically, that with developing Cyprus-US relations, in any potential crisis with Turkey, the Americans would now factor the Republic of Cyprus into their calculations. Previously, they wouldn’t have considered us, backing Turkey blindly. At least now there’s hope we won’t be history’s losers. It depends on us how well we succeed in serving our interests, rather than just serving others’.
I don’t know how accurate (as they’re fantasist liars) Tahsin Ertuğruloğlu, the “foreign minister” of the occupation regime, was yesterday when commenting on the White House meeting, saying: Recently, the US “has been suggesting to individuals and delegations wanting to visit our country not to use our country’s airport. They’re even trying to prevent them from visiting our country.” When he says “our country”, he means occupied Cyprus.
If true, this might be a tangible result of the US’s changing stance towards the Republic of Cyprus. Isn’t it significant if the US is deterring travel to Tymbou? It might not be enough, to pre-empt the naysayers. But what do we have to lose? Our national sovereignty? Half of it?
Read more:
