§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That the sitting be now adjourned.—[Mr. Jamieson.]
§ 10 am
§ Mr. Tom Cox (Tooting)I declare an interest. I chair the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Cyprus group. The group has existed for many years, and its members come from both Houses and all political parties.
Three things need to be said. First, the Republic of Cyprus is a member of the Commonwealth. Secondly, the United Kingdom is one of the guarantor powers for Cyprus. Thirdly, it is nearly 26 years since the Republic of Cyprus was brutally invaded by the Turkish army and about a third of that Commonwealth country is still occupied by a foreign power.
My hon. Friend the Minister will be fully aware of all that has taken place during those 26 years—the United Nations debates, and the statements made by the Secretaries-General of the UN; the actions of Commonwealth countries; the debates in the European Union; the role of the Council of Europe, the only European parliamentary assembly of which the four countries directly involved—Cyprus, the United Kingdom, Greece and Turkey—are members; and the role played by Parliament.
Other than the House of Representatives in Cyprus, few parliaments have been more involved in Cyprus than that of the United Kingdom. During those 26 years, both Houses of Parliament have acted to keep the issue of Cyprus alive. Sadly, although we have kept in the forefront the injustice that Cyprus has suffered and still suffers, we have not made much progress towards a settlement.
The reason for that lack of progress—it has been said repeatedly by the Secretaries-General of the United Nations—is the attitude of Mr. Denktash, the leader of the Turkish Cypriots, and of his friends among the Turkish military, Turkish politicians and the Turkish Government. Mr. Denktash and his friends have never wanted a settlement other than on their terms.
I do not believe that the Governments of the United Kingdom and of the United States of America have really pressed Mr. Denktash or Turkey into meaningful discussions such as could have led to a settlement. One cannot say that, over the years, there have not been many attempts to achieve such a settlement. Hon. Members involved in the matter, of whatever party, have always stated clearly that we are as concerned for the rights and security of Turkish Cypriots as we are for those of Greek Cypriots. We are equally concerned about both communities because their home is in Cyprus. Sadly, what has happened over the years shows that we have not made much progress.
We all wish the current talks well. My hon. Friend the Minister knows that after Helsinki we were clearly told that the current talks would be the breakthrough. I will 2WH make further points about the Helsinki discussions, which we genuinely believed would make a breakthrough. One hopes that one will be made now. As those of us who have followed the Cyprus issue over the years know only too well, our hopes have many times been built up and then caused to collapse by the attitude of Mr. Denktash.
Famagusta is a case in point. It was, and still is, one of the most beautiful towns in Cyprus. Before the invasion, it was occupied by both Greek and Turkish Cypriots. After the invasion, Mr. Denktash promised that the town would be returned to the Republic of Cyprus. Some years ago, I initiated a debate on the town in the House. Mr. Denktash clearly promised that the town would be returned and that Greek and Turkish Cypriots could once again start to live together there, as they had before the invasion. What happened then? Mr. Denktash decided that he was not prepared to allow the return of Famagusta, which is still a deserted ghost town some 26 years after the invasion. It is an utter disgrace that these circumstances have been allowed to continue. Neither the British nor the Americans did anything to pressurise Turkey or Mr. Denktash to honour the clear commitment that was given.
We know that the Republic of Cyprus is keen to become a member of the European Union. I put it to my hon. Friend the Minister that the credentials of the Republic of Cyprus are as good as those of many of the existing members and certainly as good as those of any of the applicants currently under consideration for membership. Not once, not twice, but repeatedly, President Clerides has invited Mr. Denktash to join him in the negotiations for membership of the Republic of Cyprus in the European Union. What does Mr. Denktash repeatedly reply? He says "No, no, no." Instead of participating, he makes demands and says that they must be fulfilled before he would even consider taking up the generous offer to be part of the Cyprus team and to take part in discussions for membership of the European Union. Mr. Denktash makes demands such as "Recognise my state"—a state that he created some years ago. After all those years, only Turkey recognises it. He also says that Turkey must be allowed into the European Union before Cyprus if he is to go along with President Clerides. Sadly, that demand is yet another example of what those of us who have long been involved in the Cyprus issue have seen over the years.
I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister is aware of the Loizidou case. Mrs. Loizidou lived in Kyrenia, which is now in the occupied area of northern Cyprus. She took action in the European Court of Human Rights regarding the denial of the use of her property. The judges heard the case in Strasbourg as long ago as July 1998. They found by 15 votes to two in favour of Mrs. Loizidou. Repeated attempts have been made by the Council of Europe and by the chairman in office of the Committee of Ministers to persuade Turkey to honour that judgment.
My hon. Friend the Minister will be aware that, recently, in Strasbourg, the Irish Foreign Minister, Mr. Brian Cowen, was asked for the view of the Committee of Ministers of Turkey's continuing refusal to honour the Court's judgment. He left the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in no doubt when he said that that refusal could not be allowed to continue indefinitely.
3WH What are the Government doing to impress on Turkey that, if it wants to be considered as a candidate for membership of the European Union, it must start to honour and follow certain actions, none more so than the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, made by 15 votes to two?
All of us who have been involved with Cyprus, whatever party we belong to, have worked genuinely for a settlement in which the rights of both communities are considered and safeguarded. However, we have seen our hopes destroyed year by year because of Mr. Denktash's lack of will. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will offer us an example of an action by either Mr. Denktash or Turkey since the invasion nearly 26 years ago that would say yes, they have had concerns but, to their credit, they are making moves that suggest that they want a settlement. I hope that he will do that, because many of us have struggled in vain to find such an example in the actions of Mr. Denktash, the Turkish military or Turkish politicians.
No one can dispute that Turkey has great influence over Mr. Denktash—there is clear evidence of that. By using that influence to persuade him to take part in meaningful discussions, Turkey would help itself greatly in its aspirations for membership of the European Union.
Is my hon. Friend the Minister aware that the Turkish Prime Minister, Mr. Ecevit, has gone on record as saying that there is no Cyprus problem because it was solved by the invasion 26 years ago? I want a reply on that specific point. Do the Government support that view? If they do not, I hope that we will be told so clearly this morning.
All of us who have been involved with Cyprus have always been concerned about the rights of both Greek and Turkish Cypriots. What has concerned us enormously over the years—and many Members have genuinely tried to overcome this problem—is how difficult it is for Turkish and Greek Cypriots to meet to discuss the issues that concern them and their country. We are concerned at the lack of opportunity for people such as business people, trade unionists, farmers, teachers, doctors, ordinary men and women to meet in Cyprus and say that one day there must be a settlement to this issue. There must be such discussions in the buildup to what we hope will be an honourable settlement to this long-running tragedy. Why do these people never have the opportunity to meet in Cyprus? I have to say that Mr. Denktash is the cause of the non-meeting of the communities.
It would be interesting to hear from my hon. Friend the Minister what role he feels his Department can play in getting both Turkish and Greek Cypriots to meet and discuss their concerns. I would suggest that the best place to meet is Cyprus, but if that is not possible, London or some other venue could be an option. Is this something in which he believes that his Department can play a role?
As I have already said, the British Government and the United States Government have a major role to play in seeking a settlement. However, over the years, neither of the two Governments have ever done anything that has in any way concerned or worried either 4WH Mr. Denktash or his friends in Ankara. We can see that in the on-going criticisms of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations—which I am sure that my hon. Friend has read—about the lack of progress despite repeated attempts to find a settlement.
I refuse to believe those who say that Turkish and Greek Cypriots cannot live together. There are hon. Members here today who come from areas of London and other parts of the country where both Turkish and Greek Cypriots live, work and have businesses that flourish together. The communities can live together if they are given the opportunity to do so with the proper safeguards and securities that both have the right to expect. I hope that there will be meaningful discussion at last in the talks that are about to resume following the Helsinki negotiations. Experience has shown that if those talks are to be constructive and successful the responsibility will rest not with the president of the Republic of Cyprus, but with Mr. Denktash and his supporters in Turkey, and especially the Turkish military.
After 26 years, I believe that too much time has passed and too many opportunities have been missed. This is the opportunity to restore a united Cyprus where people can live together. I hope that the British Government will be at the forefront in trying to ensure that the talks are meaningful and constructive. We hope that the talks will be the beginning of the end of this long-running, 26-year tragedy of a Commonwealth country for which the United Kingdom is one of the guarantor powers.
§ Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet)Next month, the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) will have represented his constituents for 30 years, and during that time he has taken an intense interest in the island of Cyprus. I pay tribute to him for that, as well as for initiating, once again, a debate on a very important issue. I remember the 30th anniversary because we both entered the House on the same day. Unfortunately, my political career has been a little less certain. After my first Parliament, I remember using the actor's phrase of being temporarily rested for five years.
The majority of Cypriots have been hopeful and patient for far too long. They are entitled to feel angry and frustrated because the panoply of diplomacy that has been trying to find a solution to the problem of the separation of that beautiful island has so far been unsuccessful. The United Kingdom has a special role to play as co-guarantor. The Commonwealth also has its responsibilities because Cyprus is an important member of the Commonwealth. The European Union, too, has responsibilities towards Cyprus, which is an applicant for membership. More certainly, we know that the United Nations has a responsibility to encourage peaceful settlements throughout the world, and it has committed troops to the island to defend the green line.
I can be brief because the hon. Member for Tooting touched on most of the issues that I wanted to mention. However, I emphasise the fact that successive Governments have tried and toiled to find a solution for Cyprus, so far without success. In another debate on Cyprus 18 months ago, I observed that, at that time, we were investing high hopes in three people: Sir David Hannay, a most distinguished permanent representative 5WH of the United Kingdom at the United Nations from 1990 to 1995, who had been appointed as a special representative; Mr. Richard Holbrooke, President Clinton's special adviser; and Ann Hercus, the special representative to the Secretary-General at the United Nations. I would appreciate the Minister's observations on what part he feels that those three special representatives have played and on what prospects he believes there are for that work to be continued to successful fruition. I have consistently held the view that the best prospect for the reunification of Cyprus will be as part of a wider political settlement in the region, and I believe that the United States Government have a critical part to play in that.
As has already been mentioned, Cyprus has applied to join the European Union. I can think of no country outside the European Union better qualified to become a member. Indeed, should Cyprus also want to join the single currency, I believe that its credentials are probably stronger than those of some other countries that have already joined.
§ Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton)Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the European Community should not allow any outside country to have a veto over the decision whether Cyprus should be allowed to join?
§ Sir Sydney ChapmanIt would perhaps be better for the Minister to answer that question—my understanding is that no country outside the European Union could veto the decision to allow any applicant country to join and it is entirely a matter for existing members—but the hon. Gentleman makes a good point.
Cyprus is well qualified; it could join tomorrow. I suppose that it will wait patiently until at least the end of 2002, but if ever there was a case for using the fast track, Cyprus is it. I pay tribute to the Cypriot high commissioner in London, Mr. Michael Attalides, the embodiment of patience and courtliness, who will soon leave his office to return to Cyprus. I pay tribute to him for listening to us and keeping us informed about the latest situation in his country.
I note that yet another intergovernmental conference of the European Union will take place in December in Nice. Whatever is discussed and decided at that conference, I very much hope that Cyprus's membership of the European Union will not be prejudiced or delayed. I leave the Chamber with the following thought: in the proposals to the preparatory group on institutional and other issues, the Cyprus Government expressed the belief that—I hope that, in quoting indirectly, I shall not affect the thrust of what was said—levels of decision making, at European Union and at national level, need to be clarified in accordance with subsidiarity. I do not claim to have put the Syd into subsidiarity, but on that issue at least, my views are entirely at one with those of the Cypriot Government.
§ Ms Linda Perham (Ilford, North)Like the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman), I pay warm tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox), chair of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Cyprus group, for his tireless championing of a peaceful settlement in Cyprus. Only a 6WH short while ago, he introduced an Adjournment debate on the case of Mrs. Loizidou. whom he mentioned in his speech, the property owner in Kyrenia who, nearly two years ago, won her case against the Turkish Government at the European Court of Human Rights.
Before I was elected to the House of Commons, I confess that I was more interested in Cyprus's past than its future. Having studied for a degree in classics and having steeped myself in the glories of Greece, to me, Cyprus was the birthplace of Aphrodite, the goddess of love, and the repository of thousands of years of history—ancient places and buildings, some of which it was my great pleasure to visit during two family holidays, in 1991 and 1993. On that second holiday, the reality of the present situation in Cyprus was brought home to me on a visit to Nicosia, the last divided capital in the world. For me and my family, the pain of being faced with barriers of barbed wire, soldiers and guns, forcing apart the people of that beautiful city, the capital for 1,000 years, was palpable. We later journeyed to Famagusta, which my hon. Friend mentioned with great passion and anger, to look out on the ghost town of the once idyllic resort of Varosha, with its now abandoned towering hotels.
During my election campaign in Ilford, North, I received help from several Greek Cypriots. There are also several Turkish Cypriot families resident in the area. On my election to Parliament, the friends of Cyprus was one of the first all-party groups that I joined. I attended almost all its meetings and listened to a wide range of people who are working for peace on the island, including Mr. Attalides, who was mentioned by the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet. I, too, regret the fact that he is leaving his post. There is no substitute for witnessing the situation at first hand, so I was privileged to join the visit of the friends of Cyprus from 11 to 15 October 1998, which I have declared in the Register of Members' Interests.
We engaged in a hectic round of talks to discuss the future of Cyprus with the then special representative, Ann Hercus, the British high commissioner, the European Union ambassador to Cyprus, President Clerides, Foreign Minister Kassoulides, the EU negotiator, former President Vassiliou—who recently addressed a meeting of the friends of Cyprus—the mayor of Nicosia, the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the director of the Cyprus question division at the Foreign Office and several Opposition leaders. The prevailing Greek Cypriot view was and is in favour of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation on track to become part of the European Union in the next phase. That is also the UN Security Council's view: paragraph 11 of resolution 1251 of 29 June 1999 reaffirms its position that
a Cyprus settlement must be based on a State of Cyprus with a single sovereignty and international personality and a single citizenship, with its independence and territorial integrity safeguarded, and comprising two politically equal communities as described in the relevant Security Council resolutions, in a bi-communal and bi-zonal federation, and that such a settlement must exclude union in whole or in part with any other country or any form of partition or secession.Greek Cypriots are also concerned about the presence in the north of the island of settlers from Turkey—who number about half the population—and about the 30,000 Turkish troops on the island. They are 7WH particularly worried about the cessation of bi-communal on-island contacts, which my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting mentioned.During our visit, we met Turkish Cypriots across the green line and had talks with leaders of Opposition parties. In addition, we met two members of Mr. Denktash's ruling party, Mr. Olgun and Mr. Atun—the Speaker of the Turkish Cypriot Assembly—who strongly supported Mr. Denktash's proposal of 31 August 1998 to establish a confederation of two sovereign states on the island, with a special relationship between the Republic of Cyprus and Greece, and between the northern state and Turkey. According to the February 2000 edition of Kibris—the northern Cyprus monthly—that remains Mr. Denktash's position. We have no doubt about that.
We also met Turkish Cypriot leaders and representatives—business people, academics. lawyers and other professionals—and were left in no doubt about the fact that they saw themselves as living in a de facto separate state, saved by the Turkish army of occupation of July 1974 from annihilation as a community following 11 years of Greek persecution that started in December 1963. They saw any moves to reunite the island as a threat to their security and felt that they were being forced by lack of world recognition to rely increasingly on Turkey for support for their survival, economically and politically.
Despite my instinctive academic and cultural sympathies with Greeks and Greek Cypriots, I found it immensely valuable and informative to speak to Turkish Cypriots on the island, including women—particularly as I was the only woman Member of Parliament in the delegation—about their ideas, hopes and fears for the country's future, and to listen to their views about how they and the inhabitants of Muslim Turkey are treated by Christian-dominated, hellenophilic western Europeans, who are always conscious of their ancient debt to Greece for the roots of their civilisation and heritage.
At the end of our long day of talks in northern Nicosia, some of us were taken to meet a Turkish Cypriot Member of Parliament in the Famagusta area, and I was able to look—from the other direction from when I was on holiday five years previously—towards the forlorn facades, empty hulks of hotels and deserted sands that once swarmed with happy holidaymakers. Apart from the green line area, there is no more poignant reminder of the waste and misery of the divided communities.
It is all too easy to be pessimistic about prospects for peace in Cyprus. I think that the speeches by my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting and the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet showed that they are fairly pessimistic after such a long time, and I do not blame them. Although the tragic situation in Cyprus is unique, the seeds of conflict have religious and political parallels, ancient and modern. Some people say that we will never reconcile Catholic and Protestant, Christian and Jew, Muslim and Christian, Pole and Russian, Arab and Israeli, or Greek and Turk—the differences and divisions stretch back over centuries. Just two years ago, I, like many hon. Members and others, held a gloomy view of the prospects for peace settlements in Ireland 8WH and the middle east, but some of the players in those conflicts, in the countries concerned and internationally, have made determined and sustained efforts to find ways in which to forge forward. I hope that the same will be achieved in Cyprus.
Greek-Turkish relations have improved following the mutual assistance given after the earthquake of 17 August 1999 in north-west Turkey between Izmit and Bursa, and that in Athens in September 1999. At the Helsinki summit in December 1999, Turkey was accepted as a candidate for European Union membership, which was a significant step forward from the setback two years ago in Luxembourg, when Turkey's application was refused. That led to a worsening of relations between the two communities on Cyprus, and the ending of bi-communal on-island contacts.
At the beginning of December 1999, the proximity talks started at the United Nations in New York, and a second round was held from late January to early February in Geneva, aimed at preparing the ground for comprehensive negotiations on a settlement involving the leaders of both communities, Glafcos Clerides and Rauf Denktash, although they have not met face to face. The third round is expected to start on 23 May, three weeks today.
The Greek Minister George Papandreou and the Turkish Minister Ismail Cem met at the beginning of this year to sign agreements on environmental protection, tourism, crime and terrorism, and investment. They even discussed a proposal for a joint bid for the European football championships in 2008. As the late Bill Shankly said that football was more important than matters of life and death, that must give us serious hope of a lasting rapprochement between Greece and Turkey.
I look forward to returning with my family to the ancient and beautiful land of Cyprus when it is a prosperous, peaceful, united island where all Cypriots enjoy success and happiness.
§ Dr. Rudi Vis (Finchley and Golders Green)Like my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox), I declare an interest, because I belong to various groups associated with Cyprus. It is always a bit of a shock to follow him in a debate, because he leaves little for others to say. He was followed by the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman), who is equally well informed, as is my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, North (Ms Perham).
It could be argued that one becomes associated with an issue only when one becomes a Member of Parliament, but in the road in which I have lived for more than 20 years, there are about 80 properties, of which people from Cyprus occupy 25 per cent. Of those people, 23 per cent. are from the Greek Cypriot part, and only one family is from the other part of the island, but they get along fine. In north London, I see Greek and Turkish Cypriots at many meetings, and they get on fine. Their problem is not with one another but with Turkey—Anatolians, not Cypriots.
Turkey invaded in 1974. I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting mentioned the occupied part, which constitutes 37 per cent. of the island. In 1974, far 9WH less of the population—18 per cent.—was Turkish Cypriot. It would appear that somebody just drew the green line on a map and stopped there. I believe that my hon. Friend got one thing wrong: Turkey is not alone in recognising the occupied territory as an independent republic, as it is in the fine company of North Korea, which I believe has also recognised the country.
However, the occupied land is not a generally recognised republic. I do not want to oppose the United Kingdom's freedom of expression, which is absolutely wonderful, but I become a little upset when I see several tents flying flags of the occupied part as I drive past No. 10 Downing street every day. We ought to do something about that, although that may be the wrong thing to say from the point of view of freedom of expression.
I am an optimist, but I can understand the people of Cyprus becoming pessimistic. There are several underlying causes of that pessimism. The Loizidou case in the European Court of Human Rights has already been referred to. It transpired about 20 months ago. Member states of the Council of Europe should listen to the court, but it appears that they have not done so and do not intend to. There are two interesting elements about the Loizidou case. First, the European Court of Human Rights pronounced not against Mr. Denktash or the occupied territory but against Turkey. Secondly, £340,000 was awarded not because that was the value of the woman's house, but because she did not have the benefit or the pleasure of being able to use her home. Even if it is settled, it still remains her property. I can understand people from Cyprus thinking that the Council of Europe, the United States and the United Kingdom do not listen, because Turkey has not been taken to task over the case. They must wonder what we are up to.
Another important issue is the Ilisu dam. As a country, we are to invest up to £200 million of taxpayers' money in a dam project in Turkey that will flood hundreds of Kurdish villages. Once again, we allow Turkey to get away with it. The wider Kurdish issue is another cause of pessimism. There have been many instances of human rights abuses, yet again we allow Turkey to get away with it. This country, in common with other western European countries, has to take hundreds if not thousands of asylum seekers from Turkey because Turkey, a member of the Council of Europe, treats people so badly.
Turkey is now an aspirant member of the European Union, following negotiations in Helsinki in November 1999. My hon. Friend the Member for Tooting suggested that those negotiations should not have started and that we should not have given the green light once again to the Republic of Turkey—a republic that follows none of the rules that should be followed in international quarters. I understand that we have not yet started negotiations or opened a chapter on EU membership. No chapter should be opened until the serious issues that have been discussed this morning have been resolved.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Nicholas Winterton)Before I call the next speaker, I note that three hon. Members have caught my eye and wish to speak before I call the Front-Bench winding-up speeches. If we are all responsible and succinct, I am sure that all those who wish to speak can do so.
§ Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton)I will indeed try to be responsible this morning, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I add my congratulations to my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) on securing today's debate. Congratulations are also due to the high commissioner, who is going on to higher things. We shall doubtless meet him regularly in future. I declare an interest as someone who makes regular visits to Cyprus, all of which are declared in the Register.
Comparisons are often made between Cyprus and Northern Ireland. Although it would be invidious to take those comparisons too far, I will illustrate two aspects of the Cyprus situation. The achievement of the Good Friday agreement needed the undivided support of what I would call the guarantor powers—the Governments of Britain and the Republic of Ireland. Perhaps even more important to its success was the undivided support of the United States Government. There is no doubt that America's support would help in achieving agreement between the two sides in Cyprus.
However, there are many differences between Northern Ireland and Cyprus. Many people thought that it would be almost impossible to bridge the wide gap between the Unionist and nationalist positions in Northern Ireland. At the outset, no one knew how agreement would come about, but it happened through negotiation. Cyprus has been involved in negotiations for many years and the outlines of an agreement that could help to achieve a lasting settlement of the island's dispute are already there.
We spoke earlier about the United Nations' involvement in Cyprus going back to 1963. The UN became involved in negotiations following the invasion of Cyprus in 1974. The organisation played a role in the high-level agreements of 1977 and 1979, which were signed by Mr. Denktash on behalf of the Turkish Cypriot community, and the Presidents of the Republic of Cyprus at those times. We have spoken of the unity, independence and sovereignty of Cyprus and of its having a single personality. That is critical to any agreement, but we all realise that security for everyone is another critical issue. There is a role for the former guarantor powers and the European Community, and perhaps for the United States. Security is critical for not only Cyprus but the whole region. Therefore, the people must have confidence that security guarantees will hold if an agreement is reached.
Political equality was the second issue raised in subsequent negotiations, which were held mainly in the 1980s. Political equality is a concept rather than something that can be put together arithmetically, but it is an important concept in terms of giving both communities on the island confidence that an agreement can be reached. We all wish the UN well in the negotiations that will begin later this month in New York state. The organisation has been involved in negotiations over Cyprus for a long time. Often, when we thought that the negotiations were about to succeed, we were left disappointed. However, the outlines of an agreement, which could come about with the support of all the parties, are there.
We have spoken this morning about Cyprus's application for membership of the EC. My hon. Friend the Member for Tooting said that its credentials were 11WH good. They are indeed good. I understand that its negotiations on the acquis communautaire are almost complete. I have just returned from a visit to Poland, which has problems with the acquis communautaire. Such problems do not exist in Cyprus. We are often told that Cyprus already complies with the Maastricht conditions in terms of the development of its economy. Although we talk about the difficulties that an appreciating pound causes in Britain, in terms of parity with the Cyprus pound, our pound is depreciating.
The case for membership is strong and, in addition, some of us believe that the application for membership would act as a catalyst in the attempt to achieve an agreement on the reunification of the island. That can happen. The President of Cyprus has invited the Turkish Cypriot community to join in negotiations. It will be the major beneficiary of accession to the European Community. We hope that it will grasp with both hands that opportunity and the longer-term opportunity for Turkey to accede to membership of the Community. That offer, which we discussed during the President's recent visit, remains open. The Government should do what they can to persuade Mr. Denktash and the Turkish Cypriot community to become more involved in the European Union negotiations.
Two issues are critical to reaching an agreement on the reunification of the island. First, confidence-building measures, such as returning Varosha, a suburb of Famagusta, to the Greek Cypriot community and reopening Nicosia airport, have been suggested during the negotiating process. Perhaps those are too ambitious, but it is not too much to expect the United Nations and the British Government to sponsor contact between the two communities and achieve a dialogue. The lack of adequate contact and dialogue have stopped negotiations getting under way. Those factors might be critical in creating the right climate for successful negotiations.
The second critical issue is Britain's role. It is a guarantor power, which has been involved in Cyprus since 1878. It has exceptionally good relations with both communities and the many Cypriots who live in this country. Britain has a unique role because it is a member of the European Community, the Security Council and NATO—all the bodies that are crucial to finding a solution. The present situation cannot continue. The British Government need to play that critical role because of instability in the eastern Mediterranean. This is about, not just Cyprus but relations between the two states, Greece and Turkey. There needs to be a rapprochement between them to find a solution in Cyprus, but we cannot achieve that rapprochement without solving the Cyprus problem. Britain has a great role to play and the Americans also have a critical interest. If we work with the United States, in tandem with Greece and Turkey, that solution—although not possible in the next round of talks—will be open to us in future negotiations.
§ Mr. Roger Gale (North Thanet)I apologise to hon. Members for my late arrival—there were transport problems in Kent. I also have a registered interest to 12WH declare. I have travelled to Cyprus under the auspices of the municipality of Morphou and the Cypriot Brotherhood.
In my most recent visit to the Morphou rally last autumn, I was moved, on behalf of my many Greek Cypriot constituents, to meet a man whose home is just over the green line in the village of Morphou. He goes up every year before the rally to the Troodos mountains to look down on his home. He can see it but he cannot reach it because it is illegally occupied. After 26 years, that must be unacceptable internationally. There are people on both sides of that divide who cannot go home lawfully, and they ought to be able to do so.
I am the Conservative vice-chairman of the parliamentary friends of Cyprus; the Labour vice-chairman would agree that we consider ourselves to be friends of all Cypriots. We are regarded by some as spokespeople for the south, the legal regime and Greek Cypriots only, but that is quite untrue. We want Cyprus to be freely and fairly united, based on the three freedoms. We want people to be able to go home and to move freely about their homeland. We want them to seek and gain employment wherever in that homeland they choose to live or work.
An enormous amount of work has been put into seeking to achieve that settlement on just and fair terms, most significantly by President Clerides. Tribute has already been paid this morning to his excellency the high commissioner, Michael Attalides, who has done tremendous work both in Brussels and, most recently, in London. As has been said, he is going on, indubitably, to greater things. These people have a right to our support. They have a right to be backed by the guarantor powers in their endeavours to achieve a lasting and legal solution to the current hopelessly illegal situation.
The Loizidou case has been mentioned. Turkey is clearly in breach of the rulings of the European Court, which is unacceptable for a member of the Council of Europe and should be rectified. Confidence-building measures have been mentioned and some of us have been round that circuit in the past—I was going to say circus, and perhaps that is more appropriate. There is a grave danger that Varosha and Nicosia airport can be used to delay the solution, not to achieve it.
The time has come when we all, including the Government, must recognise that the situation that has prevailed in Cyprus for 26 years is not acceptable. We must stress that point as forcefully as we can in the international arena. The European Union must do that. I also believe that the Americans, who have given considerable support to Turkey, have a duty, in their own strategic interests, to recognise the wider international obligations, which, to be brutally frank, they have so far failed to do.
There are signs of hope, however. The frail and fragile rapprochement between Greece and Turkey that sprang from the earthquake has led to signs of positive movement between those two countries. The most recent medical emergency on Cyprus itself, when people were able to cross the green line to offer assistance, has helped. There is good will. President Clerides has stretched out his hand to say to the Turkish Cypriots, "We are negotiating. You will not stop us. We intend to join the European Union, but come and participate in 13WH those negotiations." The time has come for ordinary Turkish Cypriots to seize that hand of friendship—that is what it is—and to join the negotiations and become part of a process that must inevitably happen. Successive Foreign Office Ministers have made it clear that there is no right of veto. This situation has gone on too long: a world that respects legal government cannot allow it to go on any longer.
§ Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)I will obey your strictures, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and be brief, accurate and helpful. I apologise for missing the opening speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox). Like many people, I am constantly surprised at the advent of teachers' training days after every holiday, but the lack of child care facilities in this building is no surprise to anyone.
I have been a Member of the House of Commons since 1983 and prior to that was a member of the council in the London borough of Haringey from 1974, representing Harringay ward, which includes Green lanes, which has the highest Greek and Turkish Cypriot population in the country. I represented the ward during the period of the invasion in 1974. The solidarity in the community was remarkable; people helped refugees from both sides to be rehoused and integrated into the community. There are good community relations throughout the borough and in north London generally.
It is sad that in the past there were three borders in Europe: the iron curtain, the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and the green line in Cyprus. The first has gone, the second has been reduced, and the third, unfortunately, is very much still there. Parliament must recognise that and try to understand that although the invasion was a long time ago, in 1974, the sense of anger, anguish and betrayal in the Cypriot community in this country is very strong and does not diminish with the passage of years. It will not disappear; it will haunt every British Government until there is a solution to the problem, because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Edmonton (Mr. Love) and others pointed out, as a formal colonial power, we are one of the guarantors.
The Cypriot community in Britain is much more politically involved, politically astute and politically aware now than it has been at any time in the past. This country has a political imperative to ensure that a solution is found. I do not pretend that that will be simple, but the stark reality is that Cyprus was a united island and we are one of the guarantor powers. The Turkish troops invaded and established what they would claim to be a state of their own, which no country in the world recognises, although a few might wish to recognise it. The issue is what pressure is being put on Turkish Governments. Turkey went through a military period from 1980, and it still has a poor record on human rights, which are seriously abused, and a great many Kurdish people flee the country to seek asylum in Europe and Britain.
Why do Britain, the United States and other countries pursue supportive and friendly relations with Turkey? Why do we still sell large quantities of arms to Turkey which, I am convinced, support the military structure that represses the Kurdish people? Kurdish people in the 14WH northern part of Cyprus are denied human rights. I have met, and represent, Kurdish families who escaped from Turkey to northern Cyprus believing that they would be safe and find sanctuary, but who had to flee Cyprus because of abuse by Turkish military forces, finally ending up in this country.
What is it about Turkey that is so special that it can apparently evade any international sanction despite its illegal occupation of northern Cyprus? That happens because of Turkish membership of NATO and because of lectures from Turkish leaders who say that nationalist fervour in Turkey is so great that it cannot withdraw from Cyprus without a serious loss of face; but neither of those reasons should prevent us from having a much more robust attitude towards Turkey.
I ask the Minister to tell us exactly why we continue to sell large quantities of arms to Turkey and why we are still prepared to consider underwriting a major project such as the Ilisu dam, which, if nothing else, gives a sense of approval to what the Turkish Government do, not to mention the fact that it will destroy the livelihoods of large numbers of Kurdish people in that region.
We must tell the Turkish Government that it will not be the end of everything for them if they are prepared to join in serious international negotiations to bring about an agreed and negotiated settlement in Cyprus that respects the human rights, identity and integrity of all people in Cyprus but allows people to return to their own homes. There can be nothing more humiliating for an individual than to look across the green line and see the farm or home that he or she once occupied. It is a very depressing experience for Cypriot people and I hope that this debate will serve to encourage the Government to be far more robust in their attitude to Turkey and more determined to ensure that the United Nations achieves something in Cyprus. The UN has held the line there—it has held the ceasefire, and its presence has undoubtedly saved many lives—but it is time to move on. We must ensure that the green line disappears, and that we once again see a united Cyprus and an end to misery and anguish.
I repeat that the sense of grievance, outrage and anger of the Cypriot community in the United Kingdom is not diminished by the passing of those 26 years; if anything, the bitterness and tension have increased. It is up to this Parliament and this Government to try to ensure a settlement in the foreseeable future. It is not an intractable problem, but it requires a determined effort to solve it once and for all.
§ 11.6 am
§ Mr. Richard Spring (West Suffolk)I congratulate the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) on securing this debate, and all those hon. Members who have spoken. Many of us approach the question of Cyprus with some trepidation. It is one of those contentious international issues that provoke passionate debate born of deep-seated feelings.
Cyprus and the United Kingdom have long-standing and historic ties. We are fellow members of the Commonwealth family of nations, and have ties in commerce, defence and tourism. Many Cypriots have settled in the UK, and they have greatly enriched our national life. As my hon. Friend the Member for North Thanet (Mr. Gale) observed, we can be at least a little 15WH optimistic about recent developments, despite the enduring impasse so correctly referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman).
Britain has long sought to do whatever it can to promote the interests of peace and stability on the island. A settlement would clearly be in the interests of the region. It would help Greece and Turkey to normalise their relationship. It would assist countries such as ours that have long-standing and well-established political and economic links with Cyprus. Such a settlement would clearly benefit all the communities on the island.
When Parliament has previously debated Cyprus, it has often been in the context of discouraging developments—for instance, the stand-off over the acquisition of missiles by the Government of Cyprus, and the Turkish Government's response, were disturbing. Fortunately, today's debate takes place in a somewhat warmer political climate. To some extent, that has been born out of tragedy. Last year's two devastating earthquakes helped to bring Turkey and Greece closer together, a development that had obvious repercussions for Cyprus. The genuine outpouring of concern and help among Greeks towards their Turkish neighbours was moving and praiseworthy.
The Chamber will welcome the UN initiative announced in September 1998, which was aimed at reducing tension and promoting progress towards a settlement, and resolution 1218, which endorsed the initiative. President Clerides's decision in December 1998 not to bring S300 missiles to Cyprus helped to reduce tension and to create the conditions for securing a just and lasting political settlement. The visit earlier this year of the Greek Foreign Minister to Ankara was the first such visit for 38 years. It culminated in the signing of a series of agreements on such matters as tourism, environmental protection, investment and the fight against crime and terrorism.
We are right to be cautious about expecting too much progress too soon. However, with the opening of the second round of UN-sponsored talks in January and further negotiations under UN auspices due to start in New York on 23 May, events are now moving in the right direction. Will the Minister update us on recent developments, bearing in the mind the discussions on Cyprus that took place between Kofi Annan and the Foreign Secretary during the former's visit to London in March?
The European Union has an increasingly important role to play. The Conservative party has long supported Cyprus's membership of the EU, as our European election manifesto last year made clear. Everyone wants a resolution to the division of the island, but that is not and should not be a precondition for EU membership. We also welcome the decision at Helsinki in December to grant Turkey candidate status for the first time, although also to delay formal negotiations until Turkey meets the political criteria for membership. Turkey's aspiration to join the EU is perfectly legitimate and must be judged by the same objective standards that we apply to any other candidate for membership. We are pleased that sufficient progress has been made for Turkey to be 16WH considered a candidate country and that recently Turkey was able to hold its first formal meeting with the EU in three years.
In many respects, the European Commission's latest accession report on Cyprus, published in October, is encouraging. The report showed that there had been good progress. It noted that Cyprus as a functioning market economy should be in a position to cope with the competitive pressures and market forces within the EU. It welcomed the reduction in tension in the region. It remarked on the rapid rate of economic growth combined with the containment of inflation. In the competition field, it commented on progress made on anti-trust legislation. The report also contained recommendations for improvement in areas such as structural reform and privatisation and alignment with aspects of the acquis communautaire and called for an intensive legislative programme, which has taken place in recent months.
Britain should continue to do all that it can to ease Cyprus's path into the European Union. The Conservative party welcomes the work of President Clerides in this respect and not least his introduction of market reforms. We are less concerned about progress on reform in the applicant countries themselves, including Cyprus, which is generally proceeding well, than with the EU's progress in preparing itself for enlargement. There is an urgent need for budgetary reform and recognition of the need for greater flexibility in an enlarged and diverse European Union, if such a European Union is to survive and prosper in the years ahead.
The British position on Cyprus has been clear for many years. Today, the UN's "set of ideas" for a bi-zonal, bi-communal federal government submitted in 1992 remains central to the discussion of the island's future. Only the two communities can ultimately decide what is acceptable and what is likely to last. Britain's role remains one of offering advice and providing support for the UN operations on the island and for the international attempts to mediate between the two sides. As one of the three guarantors of Cyprus, we have a special interest in the island's future. The Conservative party will continue to support the Government and the international community in attempts to bring about a lasting and peaceful settlement.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Keith Vaz)I join other hon. Members in congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) on securing this debate and on his choice of subject. The contributions that have been made demonstrate that this is a subject of great importance and relevance. I know of my hon. Friend's long interest in these matters. He has told the House that he is the chairman of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Cyprus group. He is also well known in the United Kingdom for his work on this issue within the Cypriot community. The hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman) mentioned the fact that my hon. Friend has been in Parliament for 30 years. While he spoke, I counted up the years of parliamentary experience of hon. Members present. For the day after a recess, the turnout is impressive in terms of quality and 17WH years of service. I calculate more than 100 years of parliamentary service in Westminster Hall today, and we feel all the better for it.
I want to thank the hon. Members for Chipping Barnet and for North Thanet (Mr. Gale) and my hon. Friends the Members for Ilford, North (Ms Perham), for Finchley and Golders Green (Dr. Vis), for Edmonton (Mr. Love) and for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) for their highly relevant contributions. I cannot deal with every one of their points but I promise that if I do not cover them in my speech I will do so in writing.
Several hon. Members asked about the Government's position regarding Famagusta. As they will know, resolution 414 of the Security Council of the United Nations of 15 September 1977 made clear the concern that moves by Turkish Cypriots to settle Famagusta would harm the prospects for a lasting solution. That remains the position. We strongly endorse the resolution and call on those concerned to act responsibly.
The Loizidou case was raised by several hon. Members. With our partners in the Council of Europe, we continue to make clear to Turkey the need to implement the court's judgment. The chairman of the Council's Committee of Ministers' Deputies wrote at the end of March 2000 to follow up the Council's earlier interim resolution calling on Turkey to implement the judgment. We supported that action and look forward to an early response from Turkey.
The outgoing high commissioner for Cyprus is in Westminster Hall watching the proceedings. I echo the glowing tributes that he has received from hon. Members.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerOrder. Hon. Members should not address remarks to anyone in the Strangers Gallery. They are technically not present for the purposes of the debate.
§ Mr. VazOf course, Mr. Deputy Speaker—I take your point completely. Had the high commissioner been here, I am sure that he would have heard what we have said. When he reads Hansard, he will be aware of what we have said today. I look forward to seeing him later in the week.
I am glad to say that the outlook for Cyprus at the start of the new millennium is brighter than it has been for many years. As hon. Members have said, Cyprus is engaged in two extremely important processes—the United Nations talks on a political settlement and the European Union accession negotiations. Together, the processes offer Cyprus and the international community an important chance and a challenge. The Government's hope is that we will collectively have the courage to grasp the historic opportunity now open to us. Britain remains committed to doing all that it can to assist the bringing about of a just and durable resolution of the Cyprus problem. We want the tragedy of the division of Cyprus to be overcome and we want to secure a future in which all Cypriots can enjoy peace, security and prosperity.
We are involved in a major sustained effort towards securing a comprehensive settlement in Cyprus. Important progress has been made in the past 18WH 15 months. In June 1999, the members of the G8 and the Security Council of the United Nations called for negotiations for a comprehensive settlement under the UN's auspices. That was a clear signal of the international community's desire to proceed. As hon. Members have mentioned, that led to the launch by the Secretary-General of the United Nations of UN proximity talks in December last year. The talks were aimed at preparing the ground for meaningful negotiations on a comprehensive settlement. The parties concluded a further round of talks in Geneva in February. We will be resuming discussions in New York on 23 May.
What goes on during those talks remains quite properly a matter for the United Nations and the parties involved. However, it is encouraging to have the United Nations Secretary-General's confirmation that the talks have addressed the substantive issues at the core of the Cyprus problem. We want to see a change of gear when the talks resume in May, moving towards continuous and sustained negotiations on the issues with both parties prepared to negotiate in a spirit of give and take. We have made it clear to Kofi Annan that the UK will continue to give him every support in the talks. We want decisive progress to be made in the months ahead.
I should also draw attention to the improvement of other relationships in the region, which have greatly changed from the position even a year ago. The improvements mean that discussions on Cyprus are occurring in a positive and forward-looking climate.
Hon. Members have rightly raised issues concerning Turkey. Those who read tomorrow's Hansard record of our proceedings may think that the debate has to some extent become a discussion of Turkey. There has been a clear rapprochement between Greece and Turkey. It has been reflected in ministerial contacts and visits and in the signature of a number of agreements on aspects of bilateral co-operation. On the very day on which I was in Athens, George Papandreou, the Greek Foreign Minister, set off after my meeting with him to go to Istanbul and Ankara to meet his opposite number, who then made the journey from Istanbul and Ankara to Athens. We in the UK and all the allies and friends of Greece and Turkey warmly welcome and support that development and we hope that it will be built on.
The decision made at the Helsinki European Council meeting by European Union partners to treat Turkey as a candidate for EU membership and to begin preparations for membership is already transforming the relationship between Turkey and the European Union. It means that all in the region are now working towards the common goal of EU membership. At the same time, Cyprus is continuing to make excellent progress in its EU accession negotiations. As we have heard today, that process is going well.
I noted the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Edmonton on Poland. I do not want to widen the debate to take in other countries that are applying to join the EU, but I should point out that of the 31 chapters of EU legislation in practice—the acquis communautaire—Cyprus has provisionally completed negotiations on 15. That is the greatest number of completions achieved by any candidate country. We expect negotiations on all the remaining chapters to have started by the end of the year. The Commissioner for Enlargement, G¨nter Verheugen, visited Cyprus in 19WH March. The visit enabled him to underline on behalf of all our European Union partners our desire for Turkish Cypriots to become a part of the process. I look forward to visiting Cyprus later this year to assess the state of the negotiations and to pay my first official visit there.
A number of hon. Members have focused on the question whether the continuing division of the island will be a bar to the EU accession of Cyprus. The British Government's position has always been clear. Like our EU partners, we have no doubts that the ideal outcome for Cyprus and for Europe would be for Cyprus to join the EU following a settlement. The European Union has always made it clear that accession should benefit Greek and Turkish Cypriots alike—that is why we strongly support the United Nations process to try to resolve the division of the island—but we do not accept that Cyprus's application should be held hostage to such a settlement.
No one would accept that a third country should have a veto over the accession of another. At the Helsinki European Council in December, Britain was successful in getting other EU member states to agree to a clear statement that a political settlement is not a precondition for Cyprus's membership of the EU. I can also confirm that Cyprus's EU accession is not linked to that of Turkey. I am happy to reaffirm that that is, and always has been, our position.
There is an enormous amount of work to do. Judging by the eloquent speeches, there is a great deal of concern among Members of Parliament and members of the community. My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, North mentioned Aphrodite. We do not need to go that far back to know that the problem is one of the most difficult in the world. We all recognise the huge amount of preparation and careful negotiation that has to be done. The British Government are focused on supporting those who want to find a solution. As the Prime Minister, Tony Blair—
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerOrder. The Minister cannot refer to a Member of Parliament by name; he must use a constituency title. The Prime Minister is the right hon. Member for Sedgefield.
§ Mr. VazI am sure that my right hon. Friend is delighted to know that he still has that title.
My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister told President Clerides that the UK will continue to support, with determination and energy, Kofi Annan and his special adviser, Alvaro de Soto, in their efforts towards achieving a settlement on the island. We will continue to work closely with Greece and Turkey and will provide our Cypriot friends with maximum encouragement and support. The Government look forward to welcoming Cyprus warmly into the EU. We hope that we will be welcoming a reunited island that ensures the future security and prosperity of all Cypriots. All hon. Members who care deeply about Cyprus will support that aim.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWe now come to the next debate. As the hon. Member for Totnes and the Minister are in their places, we can begin.