The Greek Cypriots have used their unwarranted status as the "Government of Cyprus" to persuade the world to practice a very damaging embargo against the Turkish Cypriots.

However, these "sanctions" do not have the authority of any UN Security Council Resolution under Article 41 of the UN Charter. It is mostly the result of the propaganda campaign conducted, and unilateral actions taken by the Greek Cypriot regime.

In order to justify their unilateral actions, from 1983 onwards, Greek Cypriots always referred to UN Security Council resolutions 542(1983) and 550(1984). Resolution 541 only talks about the declaration of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). The latter, on the other hand, in its paragraph 3, calls upon the member states "not to facilitate or in any way assists the secessionist entity".

For instance, the Greek Cypriot side has succeeded in constructing an international embargo against the participation of Turkish Cypriot sporting clubs in international events on the basis of these two Resolutions, although they did not stipulate any such action. Can having a soccer match with a Turkish Cypriot team be interpreted as "facilitating or assisting" the Turkish Cypriots?

Notwithstanding that, the international community, intentionally or unintentionally, went along with the Greek Cypriot interpretation of the afore-mentioned UN resolutions and avoid any contact, be it even cultural, with the Turkish Cypriots. This is the reason why the embargoes became effective in time. As a result, Turkish Cypriot people were unjustly isolated in the international arena.

There is now, a need for a fresh thinking on this issue, especially after the separate simultaneous referenda conducted in both parts of the Island on 24 April 2004. The results are clear; the Turkish Cypriots approved the UN Plan for reunification with a clear majority (65%), while the Greek Cypriots overwhelmingly (75%) rejected it.

Since the Turkish Cypriots strongly voted for reunification, on the basis of the UN Plan, which was declared as being "carefully balanced" by the UN Security Council, it can be safely said that Turkish Cypriots fulfilled their responsibilities towards the UN Secretary-General’s Good-Offices Mission, which had been mandated by the UN Security Council.

In other words, the Turkish Cypriot side, which pronounced itself strongly for reunification, cannot be regarded as being "secessionist" -- a claim that has been used by the Greek Cypriot side to construct an illegitimate embargo against the Turkish Cypriot people. In this regard the following statement of Mr. Mehmet Ali Talat, Prime Minister of TRNC, at the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament on 27 April 2004 should be noted: "I must highlight that we do not conceive the removal of the embargoes as a substitute for a solution. We, Turkish Cypriots, did not lose our vision for a solution and reunification of our island".

Therefore, especially after the referanda, the UN Security Council resolutions can no longer be used as a pretext or a basis for not engaging in direct economic, cultural, social, commercial.... etc. dealings with the Turkish Cypriot side, since the results of the referenda have rendered the above-mentioned concept of secessionism, and thus the UN resolutions, obsolete.

In fact, answering to a question on embargoes, in his encounter with the press on 25 April 2004, Mr. Papadopoulos, the Greek Cypriot leader also pointed to this fact and said the following: "First of all there are no embargoes in Cyprus. There are limitations which are imposed by the demand of the Turkish Cypriot authorities to be recognised as a sovereign state. As long as this is not pursued, there are no embargoes or limitations".

Another basis used by the Greek Cypriots internationally to justify the restrictions against the Turkish Cypriot side is a court ruling. On 5th July 1994 the European Court of Justice (Case C-432/92) gave its judgement on an action initiated by the Greek Cypriots in the English courts. They held that member states of the EU could not import fruit and vegetables from Northern Cyprus without a certificate issued by the Greek Cypriot authorities. The court concurred.

But the court came to this conclusion simply because the member states of the EU officially recognize only the Greek Cypriot side in the Island. The Court brushed aside the argument of the EU Commission and the British Government that the Greek Cypriots would never grant certificates to Turkish Cypriot producers, and that to require such certificates would be to discriminate against the Turkish Cypriots in violation of Article 5 of the EU-Cyprus Association Agreement 1972. The EU Commission had also made it clear that, in its view, a policy of non-recognition should not deprive the population of Cyprus of any advantages conferred by the Agreement.

Moreover, it should be emphasized that the rulings of the European Court of Justice are binding only for the EU member states.

Following the referenda, the international community has already taken some steps with a view to putting an end to the isolation of Turkish Cypriots.

It is pertinent, in this context, to recall some of the remarks made by the international personalities/organizations on the subject:

"I applaud the Turkish Cypriots who approved the plan notwithstanding the significant sacrifices that it entitled for many of them... (I) hope that ways will be found to ease the plight in which the people find themselves through no fault of their own". (Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the UN, 24 April 2004)

"The Turkish Government displayed great courage. The Turkish Cypriots did, as well, on voting for it (UN Plan). And so, I think there should be some benefits to the Turkish Cypriots for having voted ‘yes’ for this Plan". (US Secretary of State Colin Powell, interview with the press, 26 April 2004)

"The European Commission would like to warmly congratulate Turkish Cypriots for their "Yes" vote. This signals a clear desire of the community to resolve the Island’s problem. The Commission is ready to consider ways of further promoting economic development of the northern part of Cyprus". (European Commission’s press release of 24 April 2004)

"Turkish Cypriots must not be punished because of this result... Now we have to end the isolation of the North. The (EU) Commission is ready to take various measures for that aim". (Gunter Verheugen, EU Enlargement Commissioner, 26 April 2004)

"We hail the positive stand taken by the Turkish Cypriots who responded the UN initiative. By doing so, they have taken a position in favor of international legitimacy, which will allow the Turkish side in Cyprus more political openness with the world and further international sympathy. It is our duty to end the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots". Dr. Abdelouahed Belkeziz, Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Countries)

"I think it is important, as I indicated to the Prime Minister, that we end the isolation of Northern Cyprus... We made it clear we must act now to end the isolation of Northern Cyprus. That means lifting the embargoes in respect to trade, in respect to air travel..." (Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the UK, during his visit to Turkey, 18 May 2004)

"The international community and in particular the Council of Europe and the European Union, cannot ignore or betray the expressed desire of the majority of Turkish Cypriots for greater openness and should take rapid and appropriate steps to encourage it. The Turkish Cypriots international isolation must cease". (The European Parliamentary Assembly Resolution No. 1376(2004)

In the light of the foregoing, it is high time, for the international community, to fully embrace the Turkish Cypriots by engaging in direct economic, commercial, social and cultural contacts with them. Establishing direct air and sea links with northern part of Cyprus and setting up direct commercial relations with them would be a good start to ease their plight.