Jo Swinson

Cyprus - Westminster Hall Debate

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Olner. I congratulate Mr. Dismore on giving such a comprehensive introduction to this debate. He outlined areas in which progress has been made, and managed to cover a whole range of issues in this complex case. It has been very helpful to hear the experiences of hon. Members, many of whom have visited Cyprus. Some have spoken with constituents who have a link with that country and others have heard first hand from individuals-relatives of the missing and others-about the difficulties that they face. I always think that mention of such experiences brings something to the debates that we have in this Chamber.

The hon. Gentleman held an Adjournment debate on this issue on 15 January. Sadly, his cautious optimism then about the prospects for reunification now needs further qualification, and that is a great shame. However, Mr. Burrowes made the point rather well when he said that talks are happening and that there is political will on both sides. Therefore, despite all the difficulties, we must welcome such an attitude and hope that it will lead us to a peaceful solution with equality and rights for both communities.

I echo the comments made by many hon. Members about the timing of this debate. We are discussing a divided island and a divided capital in the week of the 20th anniversary celebrations of the fall of the Berlin wall, which I hope will inspire a renewal of efforts in this case.

Obviously, the clock is ticking. As many commentators have noted, the presidential elections in the north in April are likely to see nationalists elected, and that will clearly seriously damage the ongoing negotiations. Progress, so far, has been slow, but we have a window of opportunity at the moment with both Governments being pro-reunification. The fact that such a view is liable to end in a few months means that there must be a renewed sense of urgency.

The consequences of no solution have been pointed out by the International Crisis Group, which says that failure to reach a settlement could result in slow economic progress, greater defence spending and reduced international credibility for the Republic of Cyprus, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and Turkey.

David Hannay, the UK special representative for Cyprus from 1996 to 2003, has said that the prominent role played by those outside Cyprus may have had a detrimental effect, allowing Greek and Turkish Cypriots to blame outsiders for the failure of the talks. The Cypriots on both sides must own the negotiations at every stage, or they are bound to fail. That does not mean that outsiders have no role, but that their role should be discreet, and aim to persuade, not coerce, Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

The hon. Member for Hendon mentioned the natural deadlines, which obviously include the December assessment of Turkey's EU accession. I am very much in favour of Turkey joining the EU, not least for the symbolism of accepting a Muslim country into what is still perceived as a Christian club. However, the possibility of Turkey's accession to the EU presents a very curious Catch-22 situation. On the one hand, the EU is unlikely to agree to admit Turkey until a settlement is reached on Cyprus, and on the other, Turkey is unlikely to support a settlement that is acceptable to Greek Cypriots if it feels that the EU is not sufficiently progressing its application. In September, David Hannay wrote:

"So long as there is breath in the body of Turkey's EU accession aspirations, there will be some hope for a Cyprus settlement."

The EU has an important role to play here. As we have seen in other parts of Europe, such as the Balkans, the prospect of accession can be used as a very effective incentive and negotiating tool. I am not saying that the EU has necessarily always been right about the way in which it has used such a tool in the past, but it is something that can be used positively.

Turkey is often blamed for the lack of progress on the Cyprus issue. People say that Ankara has not pushed hard enough for peace, but that assertion is not entirely true. The Turkish Government, under Prime Minister Erdogan, campaigned for a yes vote in response to the Annan plan in 2004, whereas the Greek Cypriot Government, under President Papadopoulos, campaigned for a no vote.

[Hywel Williams in the Chair]

Having said that, Turkey could do more to progress the negotiations on Cyprus, especially by implementing the Ankara protocol and opening all its ports to EU trade. Furthermore, there is no reason for maintaining such a huge number of Turkish troops in Cyprus and movement has to be made on reducing that number.

However, Turkish Cypriots obviously feel very disillusioned, having voted yes to the Annan plan. They continue to be very politically isolated and economically disadvantaged, their young people cannot take part in the national sporting or cultural events and they look across the green line to the Greek Cypriots who enjoy the full benefits of EU membership and who are flourishing economically and socially. Obviously, that situation leads to genuine grievances. On both sides, property issues have also been raised.

We have heard in this debate some ideas about the types of confidence-building measures that could be put forward to make progress. It is not for us in the UK to resolve all the difficult individual issues that are at stake, but we should be an honest broker and take a neutral position, supporting Cypriot solutions.

I want to raise another point of concern with the Minister, which has been raised with me by the Liberal Democrat Friends of Turkey group. It has expressed a concern among Turkish Cypriots in the UK about the Prime Minister's decision to meet President Christofias tomorrow. Tomorrow is also the first day of a High Court hearing of the controversial Orams property case and as the meeting between the Prime Minister and President Christofias is on the same day, it could be interpreted as Britain possibly taking sides in that case. Obviously, it is not for us to become involved in international law in this instance, but we should seek to appear neutral. I would welcome it if the Minister reassured Turkish Cypriots in the UK that the British Government are not taking sides.

I also encourage the Minister and the Government generally to meet representatives of both Cypriot communities in the UK, to help to build consensus and confidence. I understand from the Turkish Cypriots who have been in contact with me that the British Government have met a particular group of Labour-supporting Turkish Cypriots but they have perhaps not met representatives from the whole mainstream of Turkish Cypriots in the UK. So I would be interested to hear the Minister's comments on that issue.

I would also like to pick up on the point made by the hon. Member for Hendon in the debate on Cyprus in January about the €50,000 donation for demining to the UN Mine Action Centre in Cyprus. That demining work is obviously an example of something that is very symbolic; not only does it help to demine the buffer zone but it helps to build confidence. I wonder whether we could have an update on how that money has been spent. Furthermore, given the €5 million shortfall that was referred to, is there any possibility of convincing other EU member states to give more money to that important fund?

In conclusion, I concur with the conclusion of pretty much everyone who has spoken today that the longer it takes to reach a settlement in Cyprus, the more likely it is that the division of the island will become permanent. Obviously, a permanent division would have huge negative consequences for regional stability and economic development.

As a guarantor power with strong relationships in Cyprus, the UK ought to have a significant influence on the situation there, although that influence should obviously be exercised discreetly. We should also be using our voice in the EU and the UN to push for a redoubling of efforts to use this window of opportunity to create conditions whereby these talks about the future of Cyprus can succeed, bearing in mind the imminent natural deadlines that exist.