AHI ALERTS PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH OF GREEK AMERICAN ORGANIZATIONS'
CALL FOR CHANGES IN THE ANNAN PLAN IN THE INTERESTS OF THE
U.S.
WASHINGTON, DC—On February 19, 2004 AHI general counsel, Gene Rossides sent a
letter to President George W. Bush informing him that "the major Greek American membership organizations are calling for serious changes
in the Annan Plan in the interests of the U.S. to make the Plan democratic,
workable, financially viable and just." The letter to President Bush follows:
February 19, 2004
The Honorable George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Re: Greek American Organizations call for changes in the Annan
Plan in the interests of the U.S.
Dear Mr. President,
I am pleased to inform you that the major Greek
American membership organizations are calling for serious
changes in the Annan Plan in the interests of the U.S.
to make the Plan democratic, workable, financially viable
and just. The organizations are the Order of AHEPA, the
Hellenic American National Council, the Cyprus Federation
of America, the Panepirotic Federation of America, the
Pan-Macedonian Association of America and the American
Hellenic Institute. Their joint statement on the Cyprus
problem follows:
"Turkey’s 1974 invasion of the sovereign Republic of Cyprus and the Turkish army’s
continuing occupation of 37.3 percent of the island with the illegal
use of U.S. arms are violations of the U.S. Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, the UN Charter, article 2 (4), the North Atlantic Treaty,
and an affront to the international legal order, and a continuing
threat to regional stability. There is no legal distinction between Turkey's 1974 aggression against
Cyprus and Iraq's 1990 aggression against Kuwait. The Cyprus problem
is one of aggression and occupation by Turkey. Viewed objectively,
Turkey in 1974 committed war crimes in Cyprus.
Then Secretary
of State Henry A. Kissinger bears the major responsibility for
the Cyprus problem because he encouraged and supported
Turkey’s invasion
of Cyprus on July 20, 1974 and Turkey’s second wave of aggression
on August 14-16, 1974, three weeks after the legitimate government
of Cyprus had been restored.
Kissinger violated his oath
of office by failing to halt immediately arms to Turkey as required
by U.S. law and refused to denounce Turkey's aggression, as Britain
and most other nations did. As Ambassador Thomas Boyatt, the Cyprus
Desk Officer in 1974, has stated, the U.S. bears a moral responsibility
to redress the situation.
We support a settlement of the
Cyprus problem through negotiations based on a bi-zonal,
bi-communal federation in a state with a single sovereignty and international personality,
incorporating the norms of a constitutional democracy embracing key
American principles, the EU acquis communautaire, UN resolutions
on Cyprus, and the pertinent decisions of the European Court of Human
Rights.
Annan Plan needs serious changes in the interests of the U.S.
The "Annan Plan," submitted by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in the fall of 2002 as the basis
for a settlement is regarded by Cyprus, Greece and the international
community as a basis for negotiations. As currently written the Annan
Plan is undemocratic and unworkable. It needs serious modifications
to make it democratic, workable, financially viable, just and compatible
with American values and the EU's acquis communautaire and democratic
norms, the European Convention on Human Rights and key U.N. resolutions.
It
is in the interests of the U.S. to press for such changes for a
settlement that will last and which could be a useful model
for other international problems including Iraq.
The Annan
Plan is a more complicated version of the 1959-1960 London-Zurich
agreements imposed on the Greek Cypriots by the British during
the Cold War.
The British had the primary influence in drafting
the proposal, with U.S. acquiescence. The Annan Plan perpetuates
the undemocratic features and ethnic divisions of the London-Zurich agreements. The Cold War is over yet the British continue their policy
of setting one ethnic group off against another.
The Annan
Plan is harmful to U.S. efforts to build democratic institutions
in Iraq because it tries to rationalize a system based on ethnic
separatism with a weak central government. The U.S. has rejected
any such solution for Iraq.
The U.S. should in its own
best interests be the champion of democratic norms throughout
the world,
not obvious undemocratic constitutions like the one proposed.
The U.S. should support changes in the Annan Plan to make it democratic,
workable, financially viable and just.
The Annan Plan
would
foster division and strife. Secretary-General Annan himself
should seek changes in the plan because the interests of the UN
are served only if the plan is democratic and viable.
The proposal is undemocratic
The parliamentary system under the Annan Plan creates a minority veto
for the 18 percent Turkish Cypriot minority. The following key legislative
matters among others would be subject to the Turkish Cypriot veto:
- Adoption of laws concerning taxation, citizenship and immigration;
- Approval of the budget; and
- Election of the Presidential
Council.
This arrangement is clearly undemocratic, a recipe
for stalemate
and harmful to all Cypriots.
The minority veto is also
present in the Presidential Council which exercises the executive
power
of the component state. Political paralysis in the exercise of
executive power will be the result.
The Annan Plan vetoes
exceed the
minority vetoes of the London-Zurich 1959-1960 agreements,
which vetoes led to the breakdown of the Cyprus constitution.
Is
the U.S. prepared to propose the Annan Plan’s minority veto
provisions for the 20 percent Kurdish minority of 15 plus million
in Turkey? Is
Turkey prepared to give its Kurdish minority rights it seeks for
the Turkish Cypriots? What about the Arab minority in Israel, Turks
in Bulgaria, Albanians in FYROM, Greeks in Albania and minorities
in Africa,
Asia and North and South America?
The U.S. position in
support of the British maneuvered Annan Plan is, frankly, an embarrassment
to our foreign policy. Rather than supporting undemocratic
norms, the U.S. should promote with vigor the democratic policy
espoused
for Cyprus by Vice President George H.W. Bush on July 6, 1988: "We seek for Cyprus a constitutional democracy based on majority rule, the rule
of law, and the protection of minority rights;" and by presidential candidate Governor Bill Clinton in 1992: "A Cyprus settlement should be consistent with the fundamental principles of
human rights and democratic norms and practices."
The proposal is unworkable
It is useful to recall that the State Department’s
Bureau of Intelligence and Research called the 1959-1960 London-Zurich
agreements dysfunctional. It predicted the problem areas. The Annan
Plan is even more complicated and creates conditions for continuous
squabbling, disagreements and deadlock.
A report by the
U.S. Department of State Bureau of Intelligence and Research on
the London-Zurich
agreements concluded "[The Cyprus settlement] also endeavors to codify in detail the position and rights
of the two communities instead of relying on constitutional custom
as other countries have done in similar situations. There are dangers
inherent not only in the comparative rigidity of the structure
of the new state but also in the detailed codification of community
rights which will tend to perpetuate rather than eliminate the
communal
cleavages." (BIR Intelligence Report No. 8047, July 14, 1959 p.22). The same criticism and
danger applies to and is inherent in the Annan Plan. The proposal subverts property rights
One of the most pernicious effects of the illegal Turkish occupation
of northern Cyprus is that the rightful owners of real property there
continue to be excluded from their property by the Turkish military.
The Annan Plan proposes a highly complicated, ambiguous and uncertain
regime for resolving property issues and is based on the principle
that real property owners can ultimately be forced to give up their
property rights which would violate the European Convention on Human
Rights and international law.
In 1996 the European Court
of Human Rights (ECHR) held in Loizidou v. Turkey that persons
who held title under the laws of the Republic of Cyprus to real property
in occupied Cyprus were the only rightful owners of that property
and that Turkey was responsible for those rightful owners being
excluded
from their real property. Since that decision, the ECHR has issued
three more decisions upholding that decision and Turkey has paid
a substantial judgment in Loizidou. The proposal fails to fully demilitarize Cyprus
There is no need for Turkish or Greek soldiers to remain in Cyprus. The
U.S. should insist on full demilitarization now.
The proposal does not provide for the return to Turkey of the 100,000 illegal
Turkish settlers in the occupied area
Central to a proper solution is the return of the 100,000 illegal Turkish
settlers to Turkey.
The proposed territorial adjustment is clearly unfair
The two proposed maps—A 28.6 percent and B 28.5 percent reward Turkey, the aggressor
and penalize the Greek Cypriots, the victims. The Turkish Cypriots
comprise 18 percent of the population and have title to about 14
percent of the land. A map proposal should provide for no more than
18 percent under
the
Turkish Cypriots.
The proposed maps are contrary to the policy
enunciated by President George H.W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail
Gorbachev in Helsinki on September 9, 1990 when they condemned
Iraq’s aggression against Kuwait and declared "that aggression cannot and will not pay." The U.S. should seek changes in the Annan Plan to reflect U.S. values and interests
The Cold War has been over for more than a decade. Turkey’s March 1,
2003 "no" vote against helping the U.S. did occur and we should not forget it! And Turkey’s
attempt to extract more billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars, a veto
on U.S. Iraqi Kurdish policy and access to Iraqi oil also occurred!
As one senior administration official said, Turkey’s actions are "extortion in the name of alliance."
The U.S. Special Coordinator for Cyprus, Ambassador Tom Weston, should
be seeking changes in the Annan Plan to make it democratic, workable,
financially viable and just. The U.S. bears the major responsibility
for Turkey’s aggression and should now be willing to stand up and
hold Turkey accountable for its aggression by calling for:
- Turkey’s armed forces and settlers to leave Cyprus now;
- Turkey to pay damages
for all the destruction and loss of life she caused;
- Turkey
to pay to all property owner’s the losses they have suffered
from Turkey’s occupation of their property since
1974 as Turkey
was forced by the
Council of Europe to pay Titina Loizidou under threat of expulsion;
and
- Turkey to pay for the costs of resettlement of the Greek
Cypriot refugees.
To
achieve a settlement, the U.S. should apply forceful economic, political,
and diplomatic pressure on Turkey, including sanctions if necessary,
to get Turkey to remove its 35,000 armed forces and its 100,000 illegal
colonists
from Cyprus."
Respectfully,
/s/ Gene Rossides
cc: Vice President Richard B. Cheney
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell
Secretary of the Treasury John W. Snow
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Lee Armitage
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
Chief of Staff Andrew Card
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice
Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman
Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs
A.
Elizabeth Jones
Director of OMB Joshua Bolten
The Congress
For additional information, please contact Angeliki Vassiliou
at (202) 785-8430 or at [email protected]. For general
information on AHI, see our Web site at www.ahiworld.org.
Back to top
|