The controversial reopening of Varosha in Cyprus, an abandoned resort town since 1974, has sparked mixed responses to PACE’s resolution. The dispute revolves around property rights, peace implications, and differing views on Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot sovereignty, highlighting the complex nature of the ongoing Cyprus conflict.
What is the controversy surrounding the reopening of Varosha in Cyprus?
The reopening of Varosha, a resort town abandoned since Cyprus’ 1974 division, has sparked dispute due to questions of property rights and implications for peace. PACE’s Varosha resolution has been met with mixed reactions, including criticisms of bias and calls for recognition of Turkish Cypriot sovereignty and potential support for a two-state solution.
Understanding Varosha’s Contested Status
Varosha, once a bustling seaside resort town, has been a ghost town since the 1974 division of Cyprus. A symbol of the protracted Cyprus conflict, its status remains a contentious issue, with the recent re-opening to tourists further complicating matters. Piero Fassino, the PACE rapporteur for Varosha, has called this move “an unacceptable change” to the town’s status. At the heart of the dispute is a question of property rights and the broader implications for peace and reconciliation on the island.
In contrast, the efforts by the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot Famagusta Municipalities show a glimmer of cooperation. The two entities have engaged in what Fassino called “constructive and future-oriented dialogue,” a beacon of hope in an otherwise tense relationship. The work done by the Immovable Property Commission (IPC) in compensating, exchanging, and restituting properties abandoned by Greek Cypriots in Varosha, while commendable, is not universally accepted as a solution, with some Greek Cypriots finding it politically objectionable or impractical.
Diverging Views on the Resolution’s Implications
The ‘foreign ministry’ in the north expressed its discontent with the resolution’s tone and content. They acknowledged the IPC’s validation by the ECHR but were critical of what they perceive as historical inaccuracies and an apparent bias favoring the Greek Cypriot narrative. The ministry accused the PACE resolution of distorting historical facts and ignoring the Turkish Cypriot community’s suffering while painting the Greek Cypriots as the sole victims of the conflict.
Moreover, the ministry’s statement suggests a belief that the resolution plays into the hands of the Greek Cypriot administration, ignoring the Turkish Cypriot leadership’s perspective. The resolution’s allegations against the north were labeled as baseless and indicative of a failure to acknowledge the responsibility of the Greek Cypriot leadership in the stalled negotiations for a unified Cyprus.
Varosha in the Sovereignty Debate
The matter of Varosha is deeply intertwined with the broader question of sovereignty and recognition. The ‘foreign ministry’ in the north emphasized that Varosha is within the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus’ borders and under their full sovereignty. They assert that the initiative to reopen Varosha was taken with respect for property rights as guaranteed under international law and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The north also called for PACE to consider supporting a two-state solution, reflecting the current realities on the island. The statement is a clear departure from the internationally-favored single island solution, suggesting an impasse that reflects decades of division and negotiation stalemate.
Perspectives from Turkish Cypriot Observers
Two Turkish Cypriot observers at PACE shared differing views on the resolution. Oguzhan Hasipoglu, aligned with the north’s ruling coalition, criticized the resolution for its perceived unfairness and contradictions. He maintained that it focuses only on the rights of Greek Cypriots and is riddled with inconsistencies, notably in its terminology regarding Turkey’s 1974 actions in Cyprus.
Conversely, Armagan Candan emphasized the need for cooperation and finding ways to build a prosperous future for both communities. Candan posited that the Varosha issue could be part of a broader confidence-building package that would foster reconciliation and mutual understanding between the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities.
As the debate continues, the spotlight remains on Varosha—a microcosm of the Cyprus conflict’s complexities and a reminder of the challenging road ahead for peace and reunification.
What is the controversy surrounding the reopening of Varosha in Cyprus?
The controversy surrounding the reopening of Varosha in Cyprus stems from questions about property rights, implications for peace, and differing views on Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot sovereignty. The recent PACE resolution addressing Varosha has received mixed responses, with some criticizing it for bias and others calling for recognition of Turkish Cypriot sovereignty and a potential two-state solution.
What is the status of Varosha and why is it a contentious issue?
Varosha, a once-thriving seaside resort town in Cyprus, has been abandoned since the division of the island in 1974. Its status remains a contentious issue, symbolizing the ongoing Cyprus conflict. The recent reopening of Varosha to tourists has added complexity to the situation, with disagreements over property rights and the broader implications for peace and reconciliation in Cyprus.
What are the diverging views on the implications of the PACE resolution regarding Varosha?
The ‘foreign ministry’ in the north expressed discontent with the PACE resolution, citing perceived bias towards the Greek Cypriot narrative, historical inaccuracies, and a lack of acknowledgment of the Turkish Cypriot perspective. They argue that Varosha falls under the sovereignty of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and call for consideration of a two-state solution as reflective of the current realities on the island.
How do Turkish Cypriot observers at PACE view the Varosha issue?
Turkish Cypriot observers at PACE have differing views on the Varosha issue. While one observer aligned with the ruling coalition in the north criticized the resolution for its perceived unfairness, another emphasized the importance of cooperation and finding ways to build a prosperous future for both communities. The debate surrounding Varosha serves as a microcosm of the complexities inherent in the Cyprus conflict and underscores the challenges ahead for peace and reunification efforts.
