THE NSC SPEAKS

It stressed that the peace process’ beginning and continuation is the government’s responsibility, and that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s Cyprus plan has both positive and negative aspects. The NSC stressed three key points:

Guaranteeing that the solution becomes a part of European Union law. 2. The possibility of problems in implementation. Taking pains over the continuation of the Turkish presence, Turkey’s role as guarantor, and bizonality.

It also stated that the decision to hold the referendum is the government’s responsibility. It’s clear that these points don’t come from the NSC’s government wing. The government has already stated that it favors the UN plan and a yes vote in the referendum. We can say that the above points belong to the presidential and military wings. It wouldn’t be realistic to expect a different decision from the NSC. It also wasn’t possible to ask the government to change its policies at this stage. Under these circumstances, the NSC made clear suggestions and released a statement evaluating the situation. Stressing that it was the government’s understanding and responsibility, the NSC left the decision up to it, which was the right thing to do.

Could the first legal problem highlighted in the statement be solved by May 1? The best way would be approval of the plan by the EU member countries’ Parliaments, but this happening by May 1 is clearly no go. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has already stated that there’s no full guarantee on this. Could there be a solution to this issue, as the NSC considers it important? One suggestion reflected by the NSC is this: ‘If both sides approve the referendum, its validity should be delayed until a future date.’ What chances are there of this suggestion going forward? Not good. If both sides vote ‘yes,’ then the Greeks would have the initiative. Making the advantages for the Turkish side a part of the island’s primary law wouldn’t be a problem for the Greeks. On the contrary, a weak solution would be in their favor.”