Under the title “I want my vote back”, columnist Unal Findik in Turkish Cypriot daily Yeni Duzen newspaper (11.08.17) reports that, because of the views expressed recently by Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci, he has decided to ask back from the Turkish Cypriot leader the vote he had given to him “as a loan” during the second round of the 2015 “elections”. He argues the following:
“[…] I know that Akinci is not responsible for the failure of the Crans Montana process. I am not making such an accusation. However, both the statement he had insistently made before Crans Montana that ‘this is the last negotiation, after this we will discuss other things’ and statements he made after Crans Montana such as ‘let the EU take us as a separate state, let us meet in the EU as two states’ forced me to take this decision.
When I voted for Akinci in the second round, these were not what he was saying. His opponent Eroglu was saying these. One of the two candidates that remained to the second round was the then president Eroglu who had caused a loss of five years for this community in the negotiating process and the other candidate was the supporter of the solution Mustafa Akinci.
Two years and four months passed since then. A lot of things were done for the Cyprus problem in this period. Both Akinci and the negotiating team headed by Ozdil Nami produced a lot of work. The progress achieved is very, very important.
However, the issue could not end. Even though Anastasiades shows Turkey as the responsible for this, he cannot be persuasive. Neither the UN nor the EU is making statements which would prove Anastasiades to be right. […] Anastasiades cannot persuade his own people. Everyone thinks that Anastasiades has focused on the elections not the solution’.
Exactly at this point, instead of making insistently and obstinately statements supporting the UN parameters, Akinci started saying things that had never been said before. […]”
Findik said that he thought that Akinci would resign because after the failure at Crans Montana he stated that “this was the last effort of our generation, it failed, I hope the new generations will do better”. He noted that he thought this because the actual duty of the Turkish Cypriot leader is to administrate the Cyprus negotiating process in the best manner and reach a solution in the direction of the “people’s” wish. He added:
“You, however, instead of doing this, started making statements which are tantamount to a two state solution, saying odd things such as the acceptance of the TRNC reality. And the most important, you have also joined the choir saying ‘let us now clean the inside of our own house’. As if someone was preventing you from cleaning the inside of your house. […]
Even though we have not been able to fully take the equivalent of our yes vote in the 2004 referendum, we were benefited for a while by the momentum we had gained. Product of that period was the Green Line Regulation and the trade with the south which is continuing today.
Therefore, we should put forward the unification and not the separation. We should put forward unifying, integrative positions and not separatist ones. Therefore, we should defend the UN parameters and not turn our back to them.
Anastasiades and the Greek Cypriot side was the one who was not prepared for the solution at Crans Montana. However, Akinci’s wrong strategy and the separatist positions he expresses in the following period, will save Anastasiades and the Greek Cypriot side. And will have no benefit for us. In the contrary, they will cause loss for us.
The supporters of the non-solution are not wringing hand in vain, because these statements are carrying water to their mill.
Therefore, I want my loaned vote back”.