For Immediate Release
 
Contact:  Christy Stefadouros 202-225-5755

Bilirakis Demands End to 31-year Illegal Occupation and Respect for Cyprus’ Sovereignty

Washington D.C., July 21, 2005 - Congressman Mike Bilirakis, Co-Chair of the Congressional Hellenic Caucus, led a bipartisan group of Members of Congress in addressing the U.S. House of Representatives to focus attention on the 31-year illegal Turkish occupation of Cyprus.  Members of Congress join Congressman Bilirakis each year in delivering speeches to highlight the continuing division of Cyprus. 

 The following is the text of Congressman’ Bilirakis’ speech:

Mr. Speaker, I rise again today, as I have for more than two decades, to voice intense objection to the illegal occupation of Cyprus by Turkish troops and to declare my grave concern for the future of the island.  The Turkish incursion into Cyprus, thirty-plus years ago, has rendered a legacy of internal division, and should worry those in this chamber who cherish freedom and espouse the virtues of democracy.

In July 1974, Turkish troops invaded and captured the northern part of Cyprus, seizing more than a third of the island.  The Turkish strategy included ethnic cleaning.  Not only did the Turks expel 200,000 Greek-Cypriots from their homes, but Turkish troops were also responsible for the systematic killing of 5,000 innocent civilians.  In the process, Turkey installed 40,000 military personnel on Cyprus.  Today, these troops, in conjunction with United Nations (U.N.) peacekeeping forces, make the small, once peaceful island of Cyprus one of the most militarized areas in the world.  Well over a quarter of a century later, approximately 1,500 Greek-Cypriots remain missing, including four Americans.

The Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot communities are separated by a 113-mile barbed wire fence, called the Green Line.  Until 2003, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), a government formally recognized only by Turkey, prohibited Greek-Cypriots from freely crossing the Green Line to visit the towns and communities of their families.  Controlling 37 percent of the island, Turkey’s military occupation has had severe consequences, most notably the dislocation of the Greek-Cypriot population and the resulting refugees.

More than thirty years later, despite efforts by G-8 countries and the U.N. generally, the forced separation of these two communities persists.  The U.N., with the explicit support of the United States, has sponsored several rounds of proximity talks between the Greek-Cypriots in the South and the Turkish-controlled north.

The U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan took a lead role in brokering a reunification proposal.  On several occasions, my colleagues and I strongly voiced our serious concerns with the Annan plan through letters, meetings, and floor statements.  We warned that the plan, as written, was not viable and did not assuage the Greek-Cypriots’ security fears.  Without a doubt, greater efforts should have been made to address these legitimate security concerns. 

By ignoring these concerns, Greek-Cypriot voters were put in the adverse position of having to oppose the plan.  On April 24, 2004, they made clear that the suggested settlement failed because it did not provide certain guarantees, nor did it ensure complete compliance by Turkey once the plan was implemented.  Had their concerns been addressed, I have no doubt that the Annan plan would have received an overwhelming positive vote. 

The Annan plan did not include a thorough removal of foreign troops from Cyprus.  Although previous versions of the Annan plan called for the complete withdrawal of Greek and Turkish forces once Turkey joined the European Union, the final version of the Annan plan provided for an indefinite presence of Turkish troops in Cyprus.  According to the plan, the number of troops would gradually decrease to 650 over a period of fourteen years. 

   The plan also provided for the continuation of the Treaty of Guarantee, maintaining the guarantor powers (Turkey, Greece, and the United Kingdom) the right to unilaterally intervene in order to preserve the “constitutional order” of the United Cyprus Republic and its constituent states.  The Annan plan failed to clarify that this treaty would not authorize military intervention.  This is a critical point, because Turkey insists that it continues to have the right to intervene militarily in Cyprus. 

Additionally, the Annan plan did not provide for a property recovery system that would recognize the rights and interests of displaced Greek-Cypriots, nor did it include a satisfactory property compensation system.  Specifically, the plan allowed for one-third restitution and two-thirds compensation for Greek-Cypriots who would lose the use of their northern properties.  The Federal Government of Cyprus would be responsible for disbursing the restitutive funds.  Nine-tenths of the Federal State’s resources, however, derive from Greek-Cypriots.  Therefore, the plan essentially called for Greek-Cypriots to pay for the loss of their property.

In addition, the plan required constituent states to pay the compensation for property transfers.  This meant that Greek-Cypriot refugees would have to request compensation from the Greek-Cypriot Constituent State.  Again, Greek-Cypriot taxpayers, who were the victims of the invasion, would be paying for their own losses. 

The Annan plan failed to institute policies that could have engendered cohesion between the two communities.  The plan failed to provide a viable government free of built-in deadlocks and voting restrictions, establishing instead a system based on permanent ethnic division and the denial of democratic rights to a segment of the population.  The plan ignored the right of all Cypriots to buy property and to live wherever they choose without being limited by ethnic quotas.  Furthermore, the plan set complicated and restrictive provisions regarding the right of Greek-Cypriot refugees to return to their homes in the north.  In fact, the plan mandated that no more than 33.3 percent of the TRNC population could be Greek-Cypriot.  This restriction would have been permanent.  In addition, under the plan, Greek-Cypriots permanently living in the TRNC and possessing its internal citizenship status would not have the right to participate in elections for its 24 representatives in the federal Senate. 

Since the vote on the referenda, Greek-Cypriots have been criticized for allegedly rejecting peace and the “only chance” for reunification.  Many people – including the Greek-Cypriots themselves – regret that the presented plan did not allow both communities to respond positively.  Criticism and anger, however, will only further divide the island precisely when the Cypriot people need the support of the international community to continue on the path toward lasting peace.

Greek-Cypriots should not be blamed for voting against a plan that they believed did not meet the interests of their country and their futures.  It is one thing for others to comment on the terms and conditions for settlement, but it is the Cypriots who must live with whatever plan is adopted.

        The Government of Cyprus continues to emphasize that it remains committed to reunify Cyprus as a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with democratic and human rights for all Cypriots.  The Cypriot Government has announced a series of measures aimed at assisting those Turkish-Cypriots residing under the control of the occupying Turkish army.   The package included a wide range of political, social, humanitarian, educational and economic measures that would enhance the Turkish-Cypriots’ ability to enjoy many of the benefits that the Republic of Cyprus offers to its citizens – including benefits which result from its European Union membership.  Far beyond a merely symbolic gesture, the package is a substantive program to integrate the Turkish-Cypriot community into the larger Cypriot society.

 The Republic of Cyprus and Greek-Cypriots have provided the Turkish-Cypriot community more than $700 million dollars in aid.  In the past two years, the government of Cyprus has paid more than $43 million dollars in social insurance pensions to Turkish-Cypriots, and Turkish-Cypriots working outside the Green Line made $7 million dollars in wages last year.  Since April 2003, more than 24,000 Turkish-Cypriots have received free treatment in hospitals and medical centers inside the Republic of Cyprus, the combined cost of which totals more than $9 million dollars. 

 Since the invasion more than three decades ago, Turkish occupied areas have received free electricity from the Cyprus Electricity Authority at a cost of nearly $343 million dollars.  Together, more than 150,000 birth certificates, identity cards and passports have been provided to Turkish-Cypriots by the Republic of Cyprus, so that Turkish-Cypriots could travel and acquire work more efficiently.  The Republic of Cyprus has begun a program where it pays the full tuition fees of Turkish-Cypriot pupils in secondary education private schools in the government-controlled areas.  The program to date has promised more than 5.4 million in tuition fees, and the program added five times as many students this year than it did in its first year, 2003.

 The occupying Turkish regime partially relaxed restrictions that limited travel across the Green Line.  Since then, there have been more than five million incident-free border crossings by Turkish and Greek Cypriots to visit areas and homes that were inaccessible to them for over 30 years.  As a result, Greek-Cypriots have infused more than $57 million dollars into the impoverished, Turkish-occupied economy in the North.  It isn't clear whether opening the border was just a tactic to ease frustrations, or a sign that Turkey has had a fundamental change of heart.  Nevertheless, it has produced rare displays of human kinship, exchanges of flowers and pastries, and emotional visits to homes abandoned in the mid‑1970s.

Still, neither the Government’s incomplete, albeit well-intentioned, benefit package for Turkish-Cypriots, nor the limited lifting of restrictions by Turkey’s occupying regime, substitutes for a comprehensive resolution to end Cyprus’ divide.  I urge the Bush Administration, the United Nations, the European Union, and this honorable body to respect the democratic decision of the Cypriot people, to remain engaged in efforts to resolve the Cyprus problem, and to work toward a fair and lasting reunification of Cyprus.

As Cyprus works toward reunification it is imperative that leaders and diplomats from the United States and other nations respect and observe Cypriot law and international law in their dealings with Cyprus.  Recently, Members of Congress traveled directly into the northern airport of Cyprus in Tymbou.  Direct flights into occupied Cyprus are inconsistent with principles of international law and in tension with domestic law of the United States.  In particular, it is indisputable that international law mandates that flights cannot enter a country’s airspace without the consent of the sovereign government.  Indeed, the Convention on International Civil Aviation, signed in Chicago on December 7, 1944, provides that “the contracting States recognize that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory.”  The Republic of Cyprus’ sovereignty over the entire territory of Cyprus has been recognized and reaffirmed by numerous U.N. Security Council Resolutions, as well as long-standing U.S. policy.

Section 620C of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, amended in 1979, separately establishes that the United States’ foreign policy towards Cyprus is to support the withdrawal of all Turkish forces from Cyprus and the reunification of the island.  Any government or congressional trip will not only derail and discourage reunification efforts, but to the contrary, will be exploited as an implicit recognition of the so-called “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” by the United States, thus further reinforcing the island’s division.

It is my understanding that at no time has the Republic of Cyprus authorized flights into the illegal airports situated in the occupied area of Cyprus.  Moreover, flights into these airports are not necessary; the Republic of Cyprus encourages visits to the occupied area in a manner that does not create insurmountable legal issues and reinforce the existing division of the island. 

What is surprising and disappointing is that our own State Department encouraged these Members to fly directly to the airport in the TRNC under the guise of easing the isolation of Turkish-Cypriots.  The State Department has authorized U.S. government personnel to travel directly to northern Cyprus, but they require that they must use their tourist passports.  I don’t understand why they are not instructed to use their official passports since they are visiting the TRNC on official business.  I believe that if the legality of direct travel to TRNC were not in dispute, requiring U.S. government personnel to use their tourist passports would be pointless.

The State Department maintains that this policy is consistent with U.S. and international law and that neither U.S. nor international law prohibits U.S. citizens from traveling directly to the TRNC.  While the State Department is technically correct that nothing precludes U.S. leaders, diplomats, staff, or citizens from entering the airport in the north of Cyprus, such actions do contravene the Chicago Convention and contradict established U.S. foreign policy.  

I have sent letters to President George W. Bush and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressing concern regarding the legality of U.S. citizens, U.S. government personnel, and Members of Congress flying directly from Turkey to the airport at Tymbou in the occupied northern part of Cyprus.  The letters also requested legal clarification on direct flights to TRNC by U.S. citizens, U.S. government personnel, and Members of Congress.  These letters were signed by more than thirty of my colleagues.

I think they need to be reminded that the United States recognizes the Republic of Cyprus as the only government of Cyprus, the Republic of Cyprus has not authorized flights into the northern airport, and the Republic of Cyprus and the United States are signatories to the Chicago Convention.  Therefore, when U.S. citizens travel to Cyprus through the northern airport they not only undermine an ally of the United States, but they also flout U.S. foreign policy, which has been in place for ten consecutive presidential terms.  As the U.S. government never would allow members of the Cypriot House of Representatives to enter the United States through an airport that is not designated as a legal port of entry, it also should discourage U.S. citizens, U.S. government personnel, and Members of Congress from doing the same in Cyprus.

Such actions do little more than undercut the reunification efforts.  The Turkish invasion of Cyprus is responsible for the destabilization of the Republic of Cyprus.  Likewise, unauthorized travel into the northern airport, especially by American leaders, belittles the Republic of Cyprus’ authority and destroys its credibility.  Cyprus’ sovereignty deserves no less reverence from the United States than any other nation with which the U.S deals and considers an ally. 

 American leaders should set an example for the rest of the world to follow, and in all our dealings with Cyprus, our utmost concern ought to be reunification.  We should look to correct the wrong that occurred more than thirty years ago.  We should work to bring about a just resolution to the situation.  And, at the very least, we must act to halt the continuing injustice to which the world community allows to continue in Cyprus.

Home ¦ About Mike ¦ Newsroom ¦ Legislation ¦ Views
Constituent Services ¦ Photo Gallery ¦ Useful Links ¦ Veterans Information
Kids Page ¦ Contact Mike ¦ Privacy and Security ¦ Accessibility