The negotiation process began after a difficult period. There will be cross-community talks during the week, and I hope these meetings, which will take place in Ankara and Athens, will make a positive contribution to the process.
As the negotiation process has gained momentum, the attention of the country’s political scene has gradually begun to shift to the Cyprus Problem. Naturally, this shift has brought with it partisan rhetoric and accusations. And then there are the comments based on hearsay...
Are we going back to the Annan Plan period?
You must remember those days when everyone had an opinion and suddenly there were more and more people calling themselves experts! The country was practically split in two, into those who said yes and those who said no. I remember that in those days we heard the word “status quo” often, and accused one another of being defenders of, or opponents of, the status quo. We held rallies and couldn’t agree on how many people had attended them. We branded people traitors to the homeland and wanted to expel those we disliked from the country. Some of us thought that a yes would connect us to the world, while others said, “There is good in saying no!” We buried the Annan Plan and even ate helva over it. At night, torches for peace burned, and we dreamed of the EU. We even had a new flag and anthem. Some of us dreamed of living in homes whose designs were already prepared. Suddenly, everyone had become an expert and could say whatever came to mind. The plan was the only item on the agenda, and we never tired of talking about it. Some of us spoke knowingly, while others spoke based on things they had heard secondhand.
Whatever the case, in my view, the Annan Plan period was a serious test of democracy that we passed successfully... However, it is hard to say that we were equally successful in ensuring accurate information flow and accurately reflecting the elements included in the plan. This was because public opinion could be fed false information through serious social engineering. It became difficult to distinguish what was true from what was false.
That is precisely why I think there are things we need to do so that we do not go through the same things again. For example, the Presidency needs a press office dedicated specifically to the negotiations, one that can ensure accurate information is conveyed. The press office should share all developments with the public, in different languages if necessary, as they happen... The Presidency has a good press office, and I am sure they will be able to handle this easily.
Expert teams need to be established to ensure the accuracy of information flow and to explain what the proposed solutions put forward during the negotiation process mean. NGOs, political parties and universities should work together in these teams, with representatives from all sections of society, and hold brainstorming sessions. I believe these expert teams will not only inform the public but also strengthen the hand of the President and the negotiating team.
There are undoubtedly many things that need to be done, but I wanted to share with you my humble thoughts on the issues that should be considered first.
For I believe that in the period ahead, it would be useful for everyone who wants a solution to share their ideas of this kind with the public.
Best regards...