The Cyprus issue in the Turkish trap of de-internationalisation

Dionysis Pantis* A constant Turkish pursuit of their well-planned and time-consistent foreign policy is the "bilateralization" of the "problems" with Greece. Similarly, on the Cyprus issue, as it remains unresolved after the military invasion of the Turkish Attila in 1974 and the occupation since then of 38% of the territory of the independent, UN-member Republic of Cyprus, the view that it is a problem of two (national) "equal" "communities" and not an issue of military invasion and occupation. On the contrary, the policy of the Republic of Cyprus was the internationalisation of the Cyprus problem, led by the United Nations, and of Greece the reduction of Turkish claims in the Aegean to a European issue, activating European solidarity for the contestation by a third country, Turkey, of the "European borders". Turkey has on many occasions clearly expressed this ambition. Former Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu expressed it, among other things, with the position that the problems in the Aegean will be solved either at the table of bilateral negotiations or on the ground and further ... clarification of the President of the Republic of Turkey Tayyip Erdogan, with his popular in the neighbour and without any need for interpretation, threatening phrase "we will come one night" according to the historical model of akincilar (raiders of the historical era of Ottoman prosperity and conquests that Islamists, Turkish nationalists and Kemalists reminisce together). The Aegean crisis in the summer of 2020 was typical of Turkish press

ure to force bilateral negotiations, instead of tension and "resolution" in the "field". While the Turkish position remains unchanged strategically (it changes only regularly, e.g. when public relations for the F16s demand it) and is reinforced with new "arguments" and claims, the Greek position, as expressed in the Athens Declaration, seems to adopt the Turkish position. Specifically, inter alia, in OP3 of the Declaration it is stated. Although the Declaration is not a binding agreement, it constitutes the framework of the attempted Greek-Turkish approach, which further presents the following characteristics: it is bilateral, without the participation or even mention of Cyprus and includes the so-called positive agenda. The absence of Cyprus from the Greek-Turkish negotiations creates a rift, a discontinuity, in Greece's policy, which, through the well-known trilateral cooperation, systematically incorporated Cyprus into its relations with third countries in the region, strengthening it diplomatically. Indeed, despite the fact that relations with Turkey are the most important issue facing both Greece's and Cyprus' foreign policy. Even further, OP2 of the Declaration states, "The Parties undertake to refrain from any statement, initiative, or action that could undermine or discredit the letter and spirit of this Declaration or endanger the maintenance of peace and stability in their region." .So without the mention or participation of Cyprus, Greece should refrain from making a statement of support for Cyprus when Turkey provokes or creates incidents e.g. on the Green Line? In the event of a crisis in Turkey's relations with the Republic, should Greece refrain from making supportive statements, otherwise it violates the spirit of rapprochement and the Declaration? Greece is now away from Turkey's complaints in Europe and the business approach benefits more the economically stronger and therefore the Turkish economic penetration in Greece. Recently in a TV interview, former Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias said that there was a proposal from the Turkish Foreign Minister to the Greek Foreign Minister, which was conveyed in a meeting in London, that Greece, Turkey, ... Greek Cypriots (i.e. the Republic of Cyprus) and ... Turkish Cypriots (i.e. the pseudo-state of the territories occupied by the Turkish invasion since Attila the Great in '74!) should move forward. That is, the Turks, in addition to isolating Cyprus from Greece, through Greece, seek to legitimize Attila and the Pseudo-state! And to free their foreign policy in the West and from the accusation of their aggression in the Aegean and their brutal invasion of Cyprus! At the same time Turkey to the East is undisturbedly playing the Islamic and so-called anti-imperialist card, exploiting the crises in Ukraine and Gaza and the Greek and Cypriot position. The Republic of Cyprus manages and successfully balances the above pressures, as its economic growth and robustness and its technological/scientific (internationally renowned universities and high-tech companies) progress has significantly enhanced its comparative strength. At the same time, militarily, its autonomous military efforts, as well as its rapprochement with the US, France and NATO, strengthen it. Modern technologies provide important answers to its defence problems in a difficult island territory divided into three parts and increase its deterrent power. The Republic of Cyprus rightly continues and invests from a position of strength in the historical/ethnic relationship with Greece, a relationship which, despite the problems, is the only undeniably real one in case of a real crisis on the Island and the Greek solidarity towards the Republic, after the ineffectiveness of the innovations and experiments of Athens or another government, can only be strengthened. The Republic of Cyprus has the depth of political institutions and the experience and knowledge that the alliance of Greece (for national and historical reasons) is the only unquestionable one at any time. Just as it has begun to understand that the era of the "kalamaradon teachers" has passed due to its own success in economy - technology - education - political system and without self-deprecation it understands that it is now itself the cutting edge of the Greek avant-garde (along with the related ... responsibilities). *Dionysis Pantis, Athens lawyer, geopolitical analyst **This article was published in SPEAK NEWS MAGAZINE the 50th anniversary issue of July 2024 dedicated to the 50 years of the Invasion and Occupation of Cyprus (1974 -2024).

*Dionysis Pantis, Athens lawyer, geopolitical analyst **This article was published in SPEAK NEWS MAGAZINE the 50th anniversary issue of July 2024 dedicated to the 50 years of the Invasion and Occupation of Cyprus (1974 -2024) and republished in the International Balkan News Agency and Documento.gr in the following links: SPEAK NEWS MAGAZINE: https://speaknews.gr/2024/07/10/to-kypriako-stin-toyrkiki-pagida-tis-apodiethnopoiisis/ ibna: (greek, english, Turkish, Bulgarian) : https://www.ibnaeu.com/en/2024/07/11/to-kypriako-stin-tourkiki-pagida-tis-apodiethnopoiisis/ DOCUMENTO: https://www.documentonews.gr/article/to-kypriako-stin-toyrkiki-pagida-tis-apodiethnopoiisis/