Strategies are important in politics particularly if you have a hostile opponent. When your opponent is replaced by a peace-maker, strategies ought to change.  Inappropriate, a Strategy of Victimhood runs the risk of backfiring and becoming a self-fulfilling strategy. This is what happened this week to Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat at the Council of Europe (CoE), where he launched into an attack of the Greek Cypriot community leader Demetris Christofias in front of the Parliamentary Assembly leaving him without understanding or sympathy there, leaving many in Cyprus and in his community profoundly disappointed. 

SPEECH BY DEMETRIS CHRISTOFIAS

Demetris Christofias' speech on 30 September could best be described as forward looking and full of hope. He chose not to spread propaganda as previous Greek Cypriot leaders might have done but instead spoke of the needs of the moment, to find a solution that will serve the “interests of Cypriots.” Trying to find commonalities, he spoke of a Cyprus for Cypriots and underlined the many common traditions and practices in our culture, which both Cypriot communities have developed over centuries of peaceful co-existence and cooperation. Christofias added: "I would like to declare before you my faith in the Cypriot identity that has evolved from centuries of living together and which we must foster and promote. I am a Greek Cypriot and proud of my roots and identity, but equally I fully respect Mr Talat’s right to be different and proud of his roots and his identity.  Mr Christofias was clearly thinking of all Cypriots when he said: “A united Cyprus, a functional state with a federal structure where the human rights and freedoms of all Cypriots without exception will be respected, should be our common legacy to our children and grandchildren.”

SPEECH BY MEHMET ALI TALAT

By contrast, Mr Talat’s speech on October 1 2008 was really a list of lamentations and political party lines as if he was at an election rally with a Turkish Cypriot audience.  Ill thought out and ill scripted, Mehmet Ali Talat's speech was effectively a continuation of the blame game, pinning as much blame as possible on Greek Cypriots while completely absolving Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots of any responsibility. Focusing too much on the past, Mr Talat described his community as the only victim of recent Cypriot history before launching an offensive on his former Greek Cypriot counterpart Tassos Papadopoulos'  "Osmosis policy”. Mr Papadopoulos was whether Mr Talat likes it or not the elected leader of the Greek Cypriot community, and recognised except in Turkey and northern Cyprus as the President of the Republic of Cyprus. That Mr Talat chose to make such an attack on someone who has been removed from office is itself backward looking, unprofessional and amateurish.  Mr Talat then accused Mr Christofias, with whom he is still in negotiation, of not wanting to share power with Turkish Cypriots despite the fact that Mr Christofias seems determined to do just that.

  As if aiming for brownie points, Talat reminded the Assembly of the Turkish Cypriot YES vote during the Annan Plan Referendum and even allocated time to mention the lack of postal services. Expressing his gratitude to Turkey and playing victim, Mr Talat's emphasis seemed to be on the need to end 'externally' imposed isolation, to establish direct trade and flights to northern Cyprus. He ended his speech by calling for the CoE to adopt resolution 1376 to end their isolation not to support a solution as one would expect.

  Mr Talat knows that the north’s isolation can only be cured by a Cyprus solution, which is why he is engaged in direct talks with Mr Christofias. Like many British Cypriots, I was expecting Mr Talat to focus on what can be achieved for the future, to find the best solution for Turkish Cypriots, yes, but for Cyprus as a whole.  Instead he left me feeling disappointed.

STRATEGY OF VICTIMHOOD

The goal of seeking an end to the ‘embargoes' referred to in the Turkish Cypriot leader’s CoE speech is not a new goal; it has been around since the leadership of Rauf Denktash.  A strategy based on victimhood, it was pursued by the north’s administration out of desperation during the worst moments of the Tassos Papadopoulos years, when the referendums put the Cyprus problem back several years. Many would argue that this Strategy of Victimhood was necessary as a counter reaction to the over legalistic strategy of Papadopoulos whose presidency is best remembered by most Turkish Cypriots for the rejection of the Annan Plan and their consequent feelings of rejection; a sentiment played upon by the anti-reunification media in north Cyprus and Turkey. Under such circumstances, the Turkish Cypriot leadership of Mehmet Ali Talat, undoubtedly egged on by Turkey pursued short-term non-solution remedies to ensure the survival of the Turkish Cypriot community, such as the call for ending the north's isolation, for direct trade and direct flights.

THAT ERA IS OVER

However, that era is now over. Mr Papadopoulos is no longer Mr Talat’s southern adversary. His new counterpart Demetris Christofias is not only former leader of the sister party of the Republican Turkish Party (CTP) but a long time close friend of Mr Talat and one of his party’s founders, his predecessor Ozker Ozgur. Even if there might be differences of opinion between them, Mr Christofias so far has shown immense goodwill towards Turkish Cypriots and like Mr Talat himself a great determination for a solution.

  Based on this, Mr Talat’s attack not only makes the cooperation between the two Cypriot leaders more difficult but creates huge problems for Mr Christofias on his home front. It forces Greek Cypriot Right Wing parties in the south's National Council to give up on Turkish Cypriots and Mr Christofias’ strategy to create a Cypriot settlement for Cyprus, while giving rise to more destructive nationalism. We all know that Mr Christofias relies on the support of DISY and elements of DIKO and EDEK for this peace process to continue.  Such support is as important as the support for a solution from other parties in the north.

Mr Talat should also respect confidentiality and leave such issues for private negotiations, not using them as a cheap political tool to undermine his counterpart.

  Desperation Strategies can work in getting attention and support from the international community but they need moral justification. To attempt to adopt this strategy during the peak of negotiations by labelling and blaming the community with whom you seek peace is contradictory to the whole peace process. Goodwill is the fuel needed to keep the process working and any attempt to undermine this by whichever community can only be seen as ill will, bad judgment or, worse still,  evidence of a hidden motive.

  Mr Talat should learn from this experience that he cannot gain the moral high ground for his community by attacking the other community or by playing one community off against the other. Such games have been played a million times already by both sides with no positive outcomes quite the reverse, and should be left in the failed past.

  This week’s speech comes as a surprise considering how far both leaders have come and considering that Mr Talat knows only too well that Turkish Cypriots have no alternative other than a solution. It is as if there is a strategy to get Greek Cypriots to pull out of the talks and so that Turkey and Turkish Cypriots regain the moral high ground. But the reaction of the Assembly showed us this week that such a strategy would certainly fail. Victimhood is not the answer. Mr Talat's only hope is to join Mr Christofias with sincerity to discover a way of working together. Nobody said negotiations would be smooth and easy, but making them work would mean everybody in the International Community will applaud him and Mr Christofias for doing so.  And a Nobel Peace prize is in their grasp.