UNFICYP

 

Secretary-General's Report to the Security Council

The present document provides the Security Council with an updated
assessment of the state of the negotiations in Cyprus since the Secretary-General's previous report
(S/2011/498 – August 2011).

SG Report Good Offices 12 March 2012

 

Job Vacancy

GO new banner
Read more

 
 
 
 
 
 
The United Nations in Cyprus invites applications for the posts
 
 
 
 

Resolution 1325 - Cyprus 2012 Open Day

 

Focus on Article

SASG Eide briefs the UN Security Council on the situation in Cyprus, 26 January 2015

 

EBE-Council

 

SASG Eide briefs the UN Security Council on the situation in Cyprus, 26 January 2015
 

 Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide briefed the Security Council at UN Headquarters on the state-of-play in the negotiations on 26 January 2015. The Council expressed its strong support for SASG Eide's efforts, noted the importance of a conducive environment and called for the resumption of structured negotiations without delay. http://bit.ly/15CKroX

 

Security Council calls for resumption of structured negotiations without delay

On 29 January, the United Nations Security Council voted to renew the mandate of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) for a further six months. The resolution adopted by the Council also expressed support for the ongoing efforts of the Secretary-General's Special Adviser on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide. Noting the importance of a conducive environment, the Council called for a resumption of structured negotiations without delay.

 You can read Security Council Resolution 2197 of 2015 here: http://bit.ly/1DdWYtQ

Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, 14 January 2015

 

EBE-14-01-2015.jpg
 

Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, 14 January 2015

We had a good and constructive meeting and I used the opportunity to acknowledge that Mr. Anastasiades has made a positive contribution. We also discussed the fact that so far this has not taken us out of the impasse that we are in. As I said yesterday I am concerned, and increasingly concerned that things are not moving, and I’m afraid that, as they are not moving, they are de facto moving in the wrong direction. But I think we should see that a step has been taken by Mr. Anastasiades, and that is something to build further on. I now call on all sides, also the Turkish Cypriot side, to recognize this, and these will be issues that I will bring to the Security Council’s attention when I meet them in a week and a half.
 
Q.        Do you have any new ideas [inaudible] to break the deadlock?
 
A.         My proposals haven’t always been successful here, and I am also now very eager to hear what the leaders think themselves, because what I can tell you is I see are two leaders who are strongly in favour of a return to the talks. The problem is that we have not been able to sort out the factors in the right order so that the talks can actually start.
 
I will reiterate that it’s a sad paradox that there is much more agreement on the future than on the present. The disagreement about the present precludes us from actually moving towards the future, over which there is quite a lot of agreement, particularly on the issue of hydrocarbons, where the issues over federal competences and shared revenues are already established. In spite of that we are seeing a prolonged crisis over hydrocarbons which serves no one and which takes us nowhere.
 
Q.        Mr. Anastasiades made a proposal as we said before, it was not only rejected by the other side, but we have a new NAVTEX here.
 
A.         Yes, and I think that I am referring to the fact that we were not able to constructively use the small window of opportunity that we had when there was no drilling and no NAVTEX at the same time. I was working intensively with both sides and other concerned countries to try to use that momentum to bring a new optimism into this, and to agree on how to get back to the table. A number of factors made that impossible. But we are not giving up because we still think there could be room for that but right now there are no prospects for an immediate meeting, and I think that will be the [case] for quite a while.
 
Q.        Do you think that the Greek Cypriot side has to stop the drilling in order to go back to the table?
 
A.         I recognize that until recently there was no agreement about whether hydrocarbons should be discussed as part of the negotiations. Now Anastasiades has made a constructive contribution, saying that towards the end of the negotiations all issues will be at the table, and that is something I hope we can build further on.
 
Q.        When do you see things moving again? After the elections in the north?
 
A.         I don’t know. That is what I am trying to find out.
 
I have said in many previous meetings with you that I am a realistic optimist. I believe that is still true, but I am getting increasingly concerned because if you remember in October I said that if this hydrocarbons crisis would last a few weeks or even a few months, it would not threaten the process itself. Now it’s lingering on, we’re way into the next year, and I think that it is really important that everybody now tries to do what they can to get over this. And, particularly because we are actually talking about an issue, to repeat myself, where we actually agree about the future state of affairs but we are not able to go there because of this deep disagreement about current affairs.
 
Q.        Do you have any idea of the key factors that have made things impossible up to now?
 
A.         There is fundamental disagreement on how to manage hydrocarbons in the current state of affairs when we do not have a solution. Just to refer to what the two sides say, and this is just a neutral reference to what has been said: The Greek Cypriot side is arguing that only the Republic of Cyprus can enter into international agreements and is using its legal rights to declare and exploit its economic zone, and when the solution is found the revenues will be shared, but before that it’s only up to the Republic.
 
And the Turkish Cypriot position is that the two entities are all concerned about the decisions that are being made now, and there should be some kind of consultation going on even now, looking forward to the future federation, so that the two sides can start acting in a federal way, even when the federation is not established. The difference on this issue is so deep that it prevents any direct talks about anything, which I think is highly unfortunate because we should now be at the table so that these issues can be discussed. I reiterate it’s a positive step from Mr. Anastasiades, and that positive step should of course be followed by some kind of response from the other side.
 
Q.        Is this the most crucial part of the negotiations?
 
A.         Paradoxically it’s crucial because it is what keeps us from talking right now. At the same time I know enough about all the issues now to say that there are other issues on which the disagreement is much higher than hydrocarbons, because you already agreed, and the leaders keep reiterating that hydrocarbons belong to all Cypriots and will be shared based on existing agreements between Talat and Christofias and also Talat and Eroglu, and that these issues would actually not be as problematic at the table if we were there. So it’s important in order to get there, if we were there I think the issues of property and territory would be more difficult.
 
Closing statement:
 
On 26 January I will be in New York to brief the Security Council. I will give an honest and genuine representation of what is going here to the Council, and of course also urge cooperation, from not only the sides here but all other states to help create the conditions necessary for a speedy resumption of talks. There is no purpose in just talking. We have to resume talks with the purpose of actually getting somewhere, so when we get back we should have a structured agreement on how we order the talks, how we sequence it, how frequently we meet, within a defined timeline, so I will be able to go back to the Council a second time and make my observations on how well we’re doing and what the prospects are for a final solution.
 
END
Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, 13 January 2015

EBE-13-01-2015

 

 
Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, 13 January 2015
 

I am here, this time, first and foremost to listen to what Mr. Eroglu and Mr. Anastasiades say about the current impasse. I am concerned about the fact that we were not able to get the talks back on track. There were some openings over the New Year but we were not able, together, to [stack the factors] in the right order and now we are back in an impasse. I think that is unfortunate that that is the case just before I go to the Security Council.

 
So I will give my honest observation of the problems we are now in, but also keep urging everyone to do their utmost to move back to the table, and to create the necessary conditions for being at the table.
 
I have in many meetings with the press said that I am a realistic optimist. I still think that’s true, but I am getting more concerned because I will remind you that in one of our earliest meetings at this particular place, I said that if the impasse lasts a few weeks and maybe only a few months, it will not hurt the process in the long run.
 
Now I think that it is actually beginning to hurt the process and we may see negative developments in the months to come so I think it is important to use this opportunity to call on the Security Council to work with all sides, or both sides, and to try to ensure that we are able to get back to the table.
 
Q. There are some rumours that the Greek Cypriot side is insisting to get some answer about the current status. They are pushing you to admit that the Turkish side is cutting the negotiations. What will you tell the Security Council about these current issues?
 
A.  Well, exactly what I will tell the Security Council, I will tell the Security Council. I think that all sides can do their part to create an atmosphere where we go back to the table. I think that both sides could have done more, but we should also recognize that certain concessions were made, and it is unfortunate that we were not able to get any further than we already did.
 
Q. And so in the current status, for example NAVTEX is still going and there is an election on the Turkish Cypriot side. And on the other side Mr. Anastasiades is insisting that if there is still an existing NAVTEX we are not going back to the table.
 
A. Yes, which is a position that he has had all the time and that is why he left the table. I would like to point out that there has been one development since last which is that there is now an acceptance that hydrocarbons can be discussed at the table. That was not the case before New Year and it is the case now, which is I think a step in the right direction.
 
Q. So you think that there is [inaudible] so it is not unsolvable problem.
 
A. I do not think this is an unsolvable problem but I am learning the more I work on it that it is a difficult problem. Again, I would say that it requires will and dedication from both side and it is not only actions, but also the way they are presented.
 
Q.  Mr. Anastasiades also mentioned that he has a precondition to come to the negotiation table, if this natural gas issue will be discussed with the territory issue, so what do you think about this? Did he….
 
A. It is not exactly what he said. He said that hydrocarbons will be discussed later in the negotiations, and then he made reference to the fact that the Turkish Cypriots have always been arguing that maps should be discussed later. So he compared it to the maps, I don’t think that he linked it directly to the maps. It is more about when in the negotiations… No, the question of early or late is only relevant if negotiations take a long time because if we were actually able to meet, we could have a speedy process where we are at least able to discussed all the issues in an organized sequence, and then it would not be that dramatic what would be on the first meeting, and would be on the third or fourth meeting.
 

END

 
65762015-01-30 10:00:00.0SASG Eide briefs the UN Security Council on the situation in Cyprus, 26 January 2015

EBE-Council

 

SASG Eide briefs the UN Security Council on the situation in Cyprus, 26 January 2015
 

 Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide briefed the Security Council at UN Headquarters on the state-of-play in the negotiations on 26 January 2015. The Council expressed its strong support for SASG Eide's efforts, noted the importance of a conducive environment and called for the resumption of structured negotiations without delay. http://bit.ly/15CKroX

 

Security Council calls for resumption of structured negotiations without delay

On 29 January, the United Nations Security Council voted to renew the mandate of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) for a further six months. The resolution adopted by the Council also expressed support for the ongoing efforts of the Secretary-General's Special Adviser on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide. Noting the importance of a conducive environment, the Council called for a resumption of structured negotiations without delay.

 You can read Security Council Resolution 2197 of 2015 here: http://bit.ly/1DdWYtQ

 

EBE-Council

 

SASG Eide briefs the UN Security Council on the situation in Cyprus, 26 January 2015
 

 Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide briefed the Security Council at UN Headquarters on the state-of-play in the negotiations on 26 January 2015. The Council expressed its strong support for SASG Eide's efforts, noted the importance of a conducive environment and called for the resumption of structured negotiations without delay. http://bit.ly/15CKroX

 

Security Council calls for resumption of structured negotiations without delay

On 29 January, the United Nations Security Council voted to renew the mandate of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) for a further six months. The resolution adopted by the Council also expressed support for the ongoing efforts of the Secretary-General's Special Adviser on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide. Noting the importance of a conducive environment, the Council called for a resumption of structured negotiations without delay.

 You can read Security Council Resolution 2197 of 2015 here: http://bit.ly/1DdWYtQ

65812015-01-14 11:00:00.0Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, 14 January 2015

 

EBE-14-01-2015.jpg 

 

Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, 14 January 2015 

We had a good and constructive meeting and I used the opportunity to acknowledge that Mr. Anastasiades has made a positive contribution. We also discussed the fact that so far this has not taken us out of the impasse that we are in. As I said yesterday I am concerned, and increasingly concerned that things are not moving, and I’m afraid that, as they are not moving, they are de facto moving in the wrong direction. But I think we should see that a step has been taken by Mr. Anastasiades, and that is something to build further on. I now call on all sides, also the Turkish Cypriot side, to recognize this, and these will be issues that I will bring to the Security Council’s attention when I meet them in a week and a half.
 
Q.        Do you have any new ideas [inaudible] to break the deadlock?
 
A.         My proposals haven’t always been successful here, and I am also now very eager to hear what the leaders think themselves, because what I can tell you is I see are two leaders who are strongly in favour of a return to the talks. The problem is that we have not been able to sort out the factors in the right order so that the talks can actually start.
 
I will reiterate that it’s a sad paradox that there is much more agreement on the future than on the present. The disagreement about the present precludes us from actually moving towards the future, over which there is quite a lot of agreement, particularly on the issue of hydrocarbons, where the issues over federal competences and shared revenues are already established. In spite of that we are seeing a prolonged crisis over hydrocarbons which serves no one and which takes us nowhere.
 
Q.        Mr. Anastasiades made a proposal as we said before, it was not only rejected by the other side, but we have a new NAVTEX here.
 
A.         Yes, and I think that I am referring to the fact that we were not able to constructively use the small window of opportunity that we had when there was no drilling and no NAVTEX at the same time. I was working intensively with both sides and other concerned countries to try to use that momentum to bring a new optimism into this, and to agree on how to get back to the table. A number of factors made that impossible. But we are not giving up because we still think there could be room for that but right now there are no prospects for an immediate meeting, and I think that will be the [case] for quite a while.
 
Q.        Do you think that the Greek Cypriot side has to stop the drilling in order to go back to the table?
 
A.         I recognize that until recently there was no agreement about whether hydrocarbons should be discussed as part of the negotiations. Now Anastasiades has made a constructive contribution, saying that towards the end of the negotiations all issues will be at the table, and that is something I hope we can build further on.
 
Q.        When do you see things moving again? After the elections in the north?
 
A.         I don’t know. That is what I am trying to find out.
 
I have said in many previous meetings with you that I am a realistic optimist. I believe that is still true, but I am getting increasingly concerned because if you remember in October I said that if this hydrocarbons crisis would last a few weeks or even a few months, it would not threaten the process itself. Now it’s lingering on, we’re way into the next year, and I think that it is really important that everybody now tries to do what they can to get over this. And, particularly because we are actually talking about an issue, to repeat myself, where we actually agree about the future state of affairs but we are not able to go there because of this deep disagreement about current affairs.
 
Q.        Do you have any idea of the key factors that have made things impossible up to now?
 
A.         There is fundamental disagreement on how to manage hydrocarbons in the current state of affairs when we do not have a solution. Just to refer to what the two sides say, and this is just a neutral reference to what has been said: The Greek Cypriot side is arguing that only the Republic of Cyprus can enter into international agreements and is using its legal rights to declare and exploit its economic zone, and when the solution is found the revenues will be shared, but before that it’s only up to the Republic.
 
And the Turkish Cypriot position is that the two entities are all concerned about the decisions that are being made now, and there should be some kind of consultation going on even now, looking forward to the future federation, so that the two sides can start acting in a federal way, even when the federation is not established. The difference on this issue is so deep that it prevents any direct talks about anything, which I think is highly unfortunate because we should now be at the table so that these issues can be discussed. I reiterate it’s a positive step from Mr. Anastasiades, and that positive step should of course be followed by some kind of response from the other side.
 
Q.        Is this the most crucial part of the negotiations?
 
A.         Paradoxically it’s crucial because it is what keeps us from talking right now. At the same time I know enough about all the issues now to say that there are other issues on which the disagreement is much higher than hydrocarbons, because you already agreed, and the leaders keep reiterating that hydrocarbons belong to all Cypriots and will be shared based on existing agreements between Talat and Christofias and also Talat and Eroglu, and that these issues would actually not be as problematic at the table if we were there. So it’s important in order to get there, if we were there I think the issues of property and territory would be more difficult.
 
Closing statement:
 
On 26 January I will be in New York to brief the Security Council. I will give an honest and genuine representation of what is going here to the Council, and of course also urge cooperation, from not only the sides here but all other states to help create the conditions necessary for a speedy resumption of talks. There is no purpose in just talking. We have to resume talks with the purpose of actually getting somewhere, so when we get back we should have a structured agreement on how we order the talks, how we sequence it, how frequently we meet, within a defined timeline, so I will be able to go back to the Council a second time and make my observations on how well we’re doing and what the prospects are for a final solution.
 
END
 

 

EBE-14-01-2015.jpg
 

Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, 14 January 2015

We had a good and constructive meeting and I used the opportunity to acknowledge that Mr. Anastasiades has made a positive contribution. We also discussed the fact that so far this has not taken us out of the impasse that we are in. As I said yesterday I am concerned, and increasingly concerned that things are not moving, and I’m afraid that, as they are not moving, they are de facto moving in the wrong direction. But I think we should see that a step has been taken by Mr. Anastasiades, and that is something to build further on. I now call on all sides, also the Turkish Cypriot side, to recognize this, and these will be issues that I will bring to the Security Council’s attention when I meet them in a week and a half.
 
Q.        Do you have any new ideas [inaudible] to break the deadlock?
 
A.         My proposals haven’t always been successful here, and I am also now very eager to hear what the leaders think themselves, because what I can tell you is I see are two leaders who are strongly in favour of a return to the talks. The problem is that we have not been able to sort out the factors in the right order so that the talks can actually start.
 
I will reiterate that it’s a sad paradox that there is much more agreement on the future than on the present. The disagreement about the present precludes us from actually moving towards the future, over which there is quite a lot of agreement, particularly on the issue of hydrocarbons, where the issues over federal competences and shared revenues are already established. In spite of that we are seeing a prolonged crisis over hydrocarbons which serves no one and which takes us nowhere.
 
Q.        Mr. Anastasiades made a proposal as we said before, it was not only rejected by the other side, but we have a new NAVTEX here.
 
A.         Yes, and I think that I am referring to the fact that we were not able to constructively use the small window of opportunity that we had when there was no drilling and no NAVTEX at the same time. I was working intensively with both sides and other concerned countries to try to use that momentum to bring a new optimism into this, and to agree on how to get back to the table. A number of factors made that impossible. But we are not giving up because we still think there could be room for that but right now there are no prospects for an immediate meeting, and I think that will be the [case] for quite a while.
 
Q.        Do you think that the Greek Cypriot side has to stop the drilling in order to go back to the table?
 
A.         I recognize that until recently there was no agreement about whether hydrocarbons should be discussed as part of the negotiations. Now Anastasiades has made a constructive contribution, saying that towards the end of the negotiations all issues will be at the table, and that is something I hope we can build further on.
 
Q.        When do you see things moving again? After the elections in the north?
 
A.         I don’t know. That is what I am trying to find out.
 
I have said in many previous meetings with you that I am a realistic optimist. I believe that is still true, but I am getting increasingly concerned because if you remember in October I said that if this hydrocarbons crisis would last a few weeks or even a few months, it would not threaten the process itself. Now it’s lingering on, we’re way into the next year, and I think that it is really important that everybody now tries to do what they can to get over this. And, particularly because we are actually talking about an issue, to repeat myself, where we actually agree about the future state of affairs but we are not able to go there because of this deep disagreement about current affairs.
 
Q.        Do you have any idea of the key factors that have made things impossible up to now?
 
A.         There is fundamental disagreement on how to manage hydrocarbons in the current state of affairs when we do not have a solution. Just to refer to what the two sides say, and this is just a neutral reference to what has been said: The Greek Cypriot side is arguing that only the Republic of Cyprus can enter into international agreements and is using its legal rights to declare and exploit its economic zone, and when the solution is found the revenues will be shared, but before that it’s only up to the Republic.
 
And the Turkish Cypriot position is that the two entities are all concerned about the decisions that are being made now, and there should be some kind of consultation going on even now, looking forward to the future federation, so that the two sides can start acting in a federal way, even when the federation is not established. The difference on this issue is so deep that it prevents any direct talks about anything, which I think is highly unfortunate because we should now be at the table so that these issues can be discussed. I reiterate it’s a positive step from Mr. Anastasiades, and that positive step should of course be followed by some kind of response from the other side.
 
Q.        Is this the most crucial part of the negotiations?
 
A.         Paradoxically it’s crucial because it is what keeps us from talking right now. At the same time I know enough about all the issues now to say that there are other issues on which the disagreement is much higher than hydrocarbons, because you already agreed, and the leaders keep reiterating that hydrocarbons belong to all Cypriots and will be shared based on existing agreements between Talat and Christofias and also Talat and Eroglu, and that these issues would actually not be as problematic at the table if we were there. So it’s important in order to get there, if we were there I think the issues of property and territory would be more difficult.
 
Closing statement:
 
On 26 January I will be in New York to brief the Security Council. I will give an honest and genuine representation of what is going here to the Council, and of course also urge cooperation, from not only the sides here but all other states to help create the conditions necessary for a speedy resumption of talks. There is no purpose in just talking. We have to resume talks with the purpose of actually getting somewhere, so when we get back we should have a structured agreement on how we order the talks, how we sequence it, how frequently we meet, within a defined timeline, so I will be able to go back to the Council a second time and make my observations on how well we’re doing and what the prospects are for a final solution.
 
END
65612015-01-13 11:00:00.0Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, 13 January 2015

2014-10-7-EBE-NA-DE

 

Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, 13 January 2015

 

I am here, this time, first and foremost to listen to what Mr. Eroglu and Mr. Anastasiades say about the current impasse. I am concerned about the fact that we were not able to get the talks back on track. There were some openings over the New Year but we were not able, together, to [stack the factors] in the right order and now we are back in an impasse. I think that is unfortunate that that is the case just before I go to the Security Council.

 
So I will give my honest observation of the problems we are now in, but also keep urging everyone to do their utmost to move back to the table, and to create the necessary conditions for being at the table.
 
I have in many meetings with the press said that I am a realistic optimist. I still think that’s true, but I am getting more concerned because I will remind you that in one of our earliest meetings at this particular place, I said that if the impasse lasts a few weeks and maybe only a few months, it will not hurt the process in the long run.
 
Now I think that it is actually beginning to hurt the process and we may see negative developments in the months to come so I think it is important to use this opportunity to call on the Security Council to work with all sides, or both sides, and to try to ensure that we are able to get back to the table.
 
Q. There are some rumours that the Greek Cypriot side is insisting to get some answer about the current status. They are pushing you to admit that the Turkish side is cutting the negotiations. What will you tell the Security Council about these current issues?
 
A.  Well, exactly what I will tell the Security Council, I will tell the Security Council. I think that all sides can do their part to create an atmosphere where we go back to the table. I think that both sides could have done more, but we should also recognize that certain concessions were made, and it is unfortunate that we were not able to get any further than we already did.
 
Q. And so in the current status, for example NAVTEX is still going and there is an election on the Turkish Cypriot side. And on the other side Mr. Anastasiades is insisting that if there is still an existing NAVTEX we are not going back to the table.
 
A. Yes, which is a position that he has had all the time and that is why he left the table. I would like to point out that there has been one development since last which is that there is now an acceptance that hydrocarbons can be discussed at the table. That was not the case before New Year and it is the case now, which is I think a step in the right direction.
 
Q. So you think that there is [inaudible] so it is not unsolvable problem.
 
A. I do not think this is an unsolvable problem but I am learning the more I work on it that it is a difficult problem. Again, I would say that it requires will and dedication from both side and it is not only actions, but also the way they are presented.
 
Q.  Mr. Anastasiades also mentioned that he has a precondition to come to the negotiation table, if this natural gas issue will be discussed with the territory issue, so what do you think about this? Did he….
 
A. It is not exactly what he said. He said that hydrocarbons will be discussed later in the negotiations, and then he made reference to the fact that the Turkish Cypriots have always been arguing that maps should be discussed later. So he compared it to the maps, I don’t think that he linked it directly to the maps. It is more about when in the negotiations… No, the question of early or late is only relevant if negotiations take a long time because if we were actually able to meet, we could have a speedy process where we are at least able to discussed all the issues in an organized sequence, and then it would not be that dramatic what would be on the first meeting, and would be on the third or fourth meeting.
 

END

 

 

EBE-13-01-2015

 

 
Transcript of Special Adviser interview with media, following his meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu, 13 January 2015
 

I am here, this time, first and foremost to listen to what Mr. Eroglu and Mr. Anastasiades say about the current impasse. I am concerned about the fact that we were not able to get the talks back on track. There were some openings over the New Year but we were not able, together, to [stack the factors] in the right order and now we are back in an impasse. I think that is unfortunate that that is the case just before I go to the Security Council.

 
So I will give my honest observation of the problems we are now in, but also keep urging everyone to do their utmost to move back to the table, and to create the necessary conditions for being at the table.
 
I have in many meetings with the press said that I am a realistic optimist. I still think that’s true, but I am getting more concerned because I will remind you that in one of our earliest meetings at this particular place, I said that if the impasse lasts a few weeks and maybe only a few months, it will not hurt the process in the long run.
 
Now I think that it is actually beginning to hurt the process and we may see negative developments in the months to come so I think it is important to use this opportunity to call on the Security Council to work with all sides, or both sides, and to try to ensure that we are able to get back to the table.
 
Q. There are some rumours that the Greek Cypriot side is insisting to get some answer about the current status. They are pushing you to admit that the Turkish side is cutting the negotiations. What will you tell the Security Council about these current issues?
 
A.  Well, exactly what I will tell the Security Council, I will tell the Security Council. I think that all sides can do their part to create an atmosphere where we go back to the table. I think that both sides could have done more, but we should also recognize that certain concessions were made, and it is unfortunate that we were not able to get any further than we already did.
 
Q. And so in the current status, for example NAVTEX is still going and there is an election on the Turkish Cypriot side. And on the other side Mr. Anastasiades is insisting that if there is still an existing NAVTEX we are not going back to the table.
 
A. Yes, which is a position that he has had all the time and that is why he left the table. I would like to point out that there has been one development since last which is that there is now an acceptance that hydrocarbons can be discussed at the table. That was not the case before New Year and it is the case now, which is I think a step in the right direction.
 
Q. So you think that there is [inaudible] so it is not unsolvable problem.
 
A. I do not think this is an unsolvable problem but I am learning the more I work on it that it is a difficult problem. Again, I would say that it requires will and dedication from both side and it is not only actions, but also the way they are presented.
 
Q.  Mr. Anastasiades also mentioned that he has a precondition to come to the negotiation table, if this natural gas issue will be discussed with the territory issue, so what do you think about this? Did he….
 
A. It is not exactly what he said. He said that hydrocarbons will be discussed later in the negotiations, and then he made reference to the fact that the Turkish Cypriots have always been arguing that maps should be discussed later. So he compared it to the maps, I don’t think that he linked it directly to the maps. It is more about when in the negotiations… No, the question of early or late is only relevant if negotiations take a long time because if we were actually able to meet, we could have a speedy process where we are at least able to discussed all the issues in an organized sequence, and then it would not be that dramatic what would be on the first meeting, and would be on the third or fourth meeting.
 

END

 
UN Protected Area, Nicosia (Chief of Mission Residence)
 
 
© 2015 Copyright UNFICYP Information Technology Unit. All Rights Reserved