Is the OSCE relevant to Cyprus? Or is Cyprus irrelevant to the OSCE?

The 18th Ministerial Council of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) is being held in Vilnius, Lithuania, on December 6 and 7. What is the purpose of the Permanent Mission of Cyprus to the OSCE, if the Organization refuses to address the challenge in Cyprus? What is the need for the Foreign Minister of Cyprus to travel to Vilnius, if his counterparts have no intention to contribute to conflict resolution and peace building in Cyprus?

Two years ago at the last Ministerial Council in Athens, the OSCE added “conflict resolution” within its mandate and as part of its role. As far as it is known, the OSCE and its Institutions have done nothing during the past two years – as in the previous 35 years – to contribute to the resolution of the conflict in Cyprus, as if Cyprus was not a Participating State.

In Athens, the U.S. delegation made reference to the “requirement of host country consent for stationing of foreign forces on their territory” with reference to Georgia. If this OSCE principle and requirement applies to Georgia with reference to the Russian Federation, why does it not apply to Cyprus in the case of Turkey?

There is no place for Turkish troops on Cyprus. The OSCE could deploy an OSCE Verification Mission in Cyprus, similar to the one deployed in Kosovo in 1998, to relieve the Turkish troops, and put the mind of the Turkish Cypriots at rest concerning their security. When are the OSCE Foreign Ministers going to ask Turkey to withdraw its occupying military forces from Cyprus?

The Foreign Minister of Sweden on behalf of the European Union referred to the “sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Georgia and Moldova, at the last Ministerial Council! The EU Foreign Ministers have not expressed the same concern about the sovereignty and territorial integrity of one of their own Member States – Cyprus! Is this an EU-OSCE double standard? What have the EU Foreign Ministers done during the past two years to put pressure on Turkey to withdraw its forces from Cyprus?

Peace building

In what way did the OSCE and its Chairman-in-Office in 2010 and 2011, respectively, implement Ministerial Decision 1/09 of 2 December 2009, on the “role of the OSCE in … conflict … resolution …” when it comes to Cyprus?

It is useless for the OSCE to argue that Cyprus is discussed at the UN. The UN discusses all the conflicts addressed by the OSCE. So by the same criterion, the OSCE might as well close down. Nobody expects the OSCE to duplicate the efforts of the UN, but if the OSCE has any real value, then it should contribute to conflict resolution and peace building in Cyprus, where the UN has miserably failed.

The U.S. delegation at the OSCE could take a leading role given the arsenal of professionally trained academics and experienced practitioners in peace building and conflict resolution. George Mason University has a School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, to mention just one academic institution. Fulbright Professor Benjamin Broome succeeded to build a peace constituency of more than 2,500 Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots from the initial handful of Cypriots from each community.

The Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy and the Alliance for Peacebuilding in Washington, DC, have a whole network of academics and practitioners on whom the OSCE could count from the U.S. alone. Other OSCE Participating States could offer their contribution so that the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots could be assisted to live peacefully together as they used to do in the past. An OSCE Mission in Cyprus for peace building between the two communities could make a difference at the grassroots level.

Dividing lines and zones

In the opening paragraph of the OSCE Ministerial Declaration in Athens two years ago, the 56 OSCE Foreign Ministers reconfirmed their “vision of a free, democratic and more integrated OSCE area, from Vancouver to Vladivostok, free of dividing lines and zones …”. What have these Foreign Ministers done during the past two years, and before, to free Nicosia from its dividing line?

The United Nations efforts in Cyprus towards a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation have failed. The little island of Cyprus does not need dividing lines and zones. It needs its citizens – Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot – to live together in peace and enjoy the fruit of the European Union membership, including the freedoms concerned. In the case of the internally displaced Greek Cypriots, they need to have the possibility to return to their homes without the presence of Turkish troops. Turkish Cypriots who used to live in the south of the island need to have the same possibility, if they so wish, and if they have not already done so.

Before the OSCE may discuss the capacity-building needs of the “Arab Awakening” partners, it needs to put its own house in order. The Mediterranean Partners for Co-operation are not going to be impressed with the OSCE, given its own track record for Cyprus, and other areas.

The OSCE has very important and useful principles. It needs to give substance to such principles in all the Participating States, including Cyprus, if it wants to be relevant. The OSCE cannot simply address the conflicts where the Russian Federation is involved in one way or another, and ignore the rest, if it wants to be credible.

Alfred A. Farrugia is a retired diplomat from Malta having served at the Permanent Mission of Malta to the UN in New York, at the Delegation of Malta to the OSCE in Vienna, and at the Embassy of Malta to the U.S. in Washington, DC, as the Deputy Chief of Mission. This contribution is written in the author’s personal capacity, and it does not reflect the position of the Maltese authorities. Alrfred A Farrauagia a Ph.D. candidate currently conducting research on peacebuilding in Cyprus at the School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University.