[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 10165]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  ISLAND OF CYPRUS AND THE ANNAN PLAN

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. ED WHITFIELD

                              of kentucky

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 24, 2007

  Mr. WHITFIELD. Madam Speaker, I rise today to bring renewed attention 
to the continued situation on the island of Cyprus. On this date three 
years ago, the inhabitants of the island participated in a referenda 
put forward by the United Nations under Secretary General Kofi Annan. 
The Annan Plan, as it is often referred to, foresaw a bi-communal, bi-
zonal federation based on political equality. We recall that the 
Turkish Cypriots in the north of the island voted by an impressive 
majority in favor of the Annan Plan. Unfortunately, this support was 
not reciprocated by the Greek Cypriots and a comprehensive settlement 
was not, nor has been since, agreed to.
  The Annan Plan was the product of intense negotiations conducted 
under the auspices of the United Nations Secretary General between the 
Turkish Cypriots, Greek Cypriots, Turkey and Greece. It was the first 
plan to date to be submitted for public approval. In addition, it 
struck a fair compromise between the two sides on the island and was 
supported by both the United States and the European Union. Had it 
passed, it would have brought about a resolution to the longstanding 
separation of the island and contributed to political stability in this 
region of the world. Following the referenda, the Greek Cypriot side, 
which rejected the Annan Plan, was granted entrance into the EU. 
However, the Turkish Cypriot side, which accepted the settlement plan, 
remained outside the EU.
  Soon after the referenda, the former U.N. Secretary-General, in his 
report to the Security Council, pointed out this injustice and stressed 
that the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots should be lifted given that 
they had voted for a settlement. In the same report, he called upon all 
states to eliminate the unnecessary restrictions and barriers that have 
the effect of isolating the people of Northern Cyprus and impeding 
development.
  The Council of the European Union, the Parliamentary Assembly of the 
Council of Europe and the Organization of the Islamic Conference all 
concurred in declaring the need to put right this injustice.
  Although it has been three years since the international community 
made commitments towards this end, and despite the conviction that 
reducing the inequalities between the economies of the two sides would 
facilitate the reunification of the island, the necessary steps have 
not been taken regarding the removal or relaxation of the isolation. 
Admirably, the Turkish Cypriots have not wavered in their determination 
to engage in further efforts to find a comprehensive solution to the 
Cyprus problem and they welcome the initiatives carried out under the 
mission of good offices of the U.N. Secretary General.
  More than ever before, as supporters of a comprehensive settlement on 
the island, I strongly believe that the removal of the isolation of the 
Turkish Cypriots--economic, social, and political--would be the most 
positive step in the quest for the resumption of political negotiations 
on the path to a settlement. The Turkish Cypriots have demonstrated 
remarkable flexibility and political maturity. They rose to the 
occasion when the critical moment came three years ago in mutually 
deciding the future of Cyprus. Acknowledging and properly responding to 
their constructive behavior is not only the right message to all 
concerned, but is also a requisite of fairness and justice.