The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Draft Security Framework for post-solution Cyprus

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

Draft Security Framework for post-solution Cyprus

Postby cannedmoose » Sat Mar 19, 2005 7:05 pm

Hi folks,

A while ago Alex L proposed a draft comprehensive framework for a settlement. Since then, I've been working on my own version, based upon Alex's initial thoughts, the feedback submitted by your guys and subsequent related threads.

To give you an idea of my thoughts so far, I've yet to finalise the detail on these, so this is a lengthy precis of the areas I've looked at so far.

Government

The proposed Cyprus would have a bizonal, federal structure, with two Constituent States (CS) and joint Federal Zones at the following locations:

1. Lefkosia/Lefkoşa, including the old Nicosia International Airport area
2. Ammoxostos/Gazimağusa, including the port area
3. Karpass, including the religious site at Apostolos Andreas (which would become a designated National Park area)
4. Akamas (which would similarly become a designated National Park area)
5. Hala Sultan Tekke, within the current boundaries of the religious area
6. The following ports and airports (within their current boundaries): Pafos International Airport; Larnaka International Airport; Lemessos Port area; Larnaka Port area; Ercan International Airport; Kyrenia Port.

The government would comprise a number of institutions:

1. President and Vice President
2. Federal Senate
3. Federal Chamber
4. Northern CS Senate
5. Southern CS Senate
6. Northern CS Chamber
7. Southern CS Chamber

Presidency: The Presidency would be a purely ceremonial position, lacking full executive powers. The President would assume Presidency over the Southern Constituent State, with the Vice-President taking the same role in the Northern Constituent State. The positions will be elected from within the CS Senate, subject to approval by majority vote in the CS Chambers.

Federal Senate: Pending completion

Federal Chamber: The Joint CS Chamber would comprise the elected representatives of both the Northern and Southern CS Chambers in joint session. Need to finalise rules on this one, in regard to voting etc. The Federal Chamber would consist of all 83 CS representatives in a joint chamber, along party-grouping lines according to ideology. Parties would be encouraged to form alliances outside their community (similar to those operating in the European Parliament). The Federal chamber would have limited scope, at least initially, unless powers were devolved to it by the CS Chambers. The Federal Chamber would also have responsibility for administration of all Federal Zones and the Federal Civil Service.

Separate CS chambers: Electoral constituencies would consist of roughly 10,000 individuals, with a census before the enactment of this agreement establishing the constituency boundaries within each CS. On a rough estimate, this would mean that the Northern Constituent State Chamber (effectively the TC CS) would have a membership of 16 (assuming 160,000 population, with the Southern Constituent State (effectively the GC CS) comprising 64 seats (assuming 640,000 population), with 3 seats reserved for Maronite, Latin and Armenian members. How these chambers would work individually is something I'll post once I've worked on it, but they would have effect day-to-day administrative powers over the CS territories. They would also represent the CS internationally in fora where regional actors are permitted.

Constituent and Federal State Boundaries

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs20&d=05116&f=FederalCYMap.jpg

See the link above for a map of the proposal. On a very rough estimate, it would probably result in the following territorial split:

Federal Zones: 9%
British SBAs: 1%
Northern Constituent State: 20%
Southern Constituent State: 70%

Remembering that substantial numbers of the populations (on both sides) would be incorporated into the Federal Zones. The advantage of this boundary is that it markedly reduces the size of the 'TC' zone of control, straightens the frontier and returns large areas near Morphou and in Mesaoria to the 'GC' zone of control. Sensitive areas such as Karpass, Akamas and the religious sites at Apostolos Andreas and Hala Sultan Tekke would also come under Federal, i.e. joint control.

Security

This is something that I feel is complete and would welcome detailed feedback on:

1. Security

(a) Establishment and maintenance of a joint Cyprus civil guard, trained by instructors from an impartial country, preferably either The Netherlands, France, Italy or Germany. The force would be limited to a manpower of 4,000 men. There would be no ethnic quota, although equal opportunities should exist for both GC and TC participation in the force. Promotion will take place on the basis of merit and shall be decided by the Civil Guard commander, who shall be either GC or TC. The post of Civil Guard commander will, for a period of 3 years from enforcement of this agreement, be selected by the NATO council members and shall not be a member of the Greek or Turkish armed forces. After this 3 year period, the commander shall be selected by the Federal Government of Cyprus by unanimity. In the absence of unanimous agreement, the commander will be selected by the NATO council members pending an agreed candidate.

(b) This force would be comprised of combined TC and GC units, with English as the common language of communication, thus also facilitating integration into the system suggested in (h) below. Command orders would be required to be issued in English and recruits would receive intensive schooling in the English language upon entering the force.

(c) This force would function in a similar capacity to the Gendarmerie National in France, the Arma dei Carabinieri in Italy and the Koninklijke Marechaussée in the Netherlands - a limited paramilitary unit used to maintain public order and act in close support to regular military and police units.

(d) The Cypriot force would become a member of the European Gendarmerie Force, with regular exchanges between officers from the other five nations involved (France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain).

(e) Cyprus would become responsible for the protection and maintenance of its own sovereignty and indivisibility. However, in the event of internal strife, Cypriot sovereignty and indivisibility would be written into the NATO treaties, with the NATO Council as the formal guarantor of Cyprus security. A majority decision within the Council would be required for intervention, which would be aimed at restoration of the status quo and the resumption of peace talks within one calendar month of intervention.

(f) Interventions would only be permitted in the case of severe social unrest, foreign invasion or an environmental calamity and would require agreement by majority decision in the NATO council. No individual NATO member would have right of veto or interference in such operations (thus preventing a block from Greece, Turkey or any interested party). Similarly, no NATO member would carry the right of unilateral intervention.

(g) Interventions would preclude the involvement of Turkish or Greek combat units, other than medical and logistic support units. All NATO facilities in member countries would be open for use in interventions (thus permitting NATO forces to use Greek and Turkish facilities, without direct Greek or Turkish involvement in the operation).

(h) Cyprus would assume membership of the NATO alliance and the related European defence structures. In the absence of the collective security clause being invoked, the involvement of Cypriot forces outside Cyprus borders in NATO operations would be limited to the provision of medical, logistical and intelligence forces and would be subject to approval by the Cyprus government by majority vote.

(i) Within NATO SHAPE, the formation of a new Joint Forces Command – Nicosia would take place. This would assume responsibility for NATO command in the Eastern Mediterranean
incorporating Greece, Turkey and Cyprus. This Command would assume devolved responsibility from Joint Force Command – Naples. Joint Force Command headquarters would become located in the Federal Zone in Nicosia. In addition to assuming Joint Command over sea and airspace in the region, the Command would conduct joint annual exercises involving the forces of Greece, Turkey and Cyprus (as well as other invited NATO and non-NATO states). These exercises would take place in the airspace, seaspace and landspace of all three members of Joint Command – Nicosia, on a revolving basis (i.e. one year Turkey, next year Greece, next year Cyprus). Leadership of the command would rotate amongst the triumvirate every 2 years, with the Joint Force Commander reporting directly to Joint Force Commander - Naples.

(j) Other than in the Joint Force Commander HQ in Nicosia, no non-Cypriot NATO forces would be permanently stationed on the island. This does not preclude the participation of NATO forces in limited-time exercises to support the development of the Cypriot forces, particularly in areas such as border security, prevention of drug-trafficking, illegal immigration and peace-keeping activities.

(k) The Cypriot Civil Guard would not maintain or operate heavy weapons such as main battle tanks and heavy artillery and would be equipped with systems designed for domestic use only and incapable of sustained offensive operations. An international treaty governing weapons imports to Cyprus would be established to prevent import of any weapons that could be used outside these parameters.

(l) A Border Security unit, comprising 500 men, within the Civil Guard would be established and would be equipped with Coastguard vessels (permitted to carry self-defensive systems and heavy-calibre machine guns) and air surveillance drones and light helicopters (permitted to carry self-defensive systems and heavy-calibre machine guns).

(m) Most current military establishments would be disbanded and the land returned to civilian use. Where ex-base land is located within Constituent State (CS) territories, the CS authorities will assume ownership and will be responsible for disbursing. Where the land is located within Federal territories, the Federal Government will assume ownership and will be responsible for disbursing. Where land was previous owned by private individuals, the CS and Federal Governments will reserve the right of compulsory purchase if required.

(n) All remaining Turkish and Greek troops would be subject to immediate withdrawal and replaced by an interim Cyprus Stabilisation Force (CYSTFOR) of 8,000 comprising units from the European Gendarmerie Force and NATO. These would remain for a period of 3 years from the date of this agreement and would assume the functions assigned to the Cyprus Civil Guard throughout this period. As Cypriot Civil Guard units come on stream, these would interoperate with the EGF forces, gradually replaced them in operation zones until the EGF is able to retire completely (with a small number of trainers remaining on a rotational basis).

(o) All Turkish-Cypriot and Greek-Cypriot military units would return to base, supervised by NATO observers, and the demobbing process would begin, with selection tests for those wishing to remain in the Civil Guard taking place during the first 12 months.

(p) NATO observers would also be responsible for the removal and/or decommissioning of all weapons not required by the Civil Guard units. This process would begin immediately. Where systems are of high-value, NATO forces would have first right of refusal on the purchase of these systems at current market value.

(q) The Sovereign Base Areas would be reduced in size, as prescribed in Annan V and the vacant land returned to civilian use. Sovereignty over the SBAs would be formally restored to the Cypriot government, although the UK would retain a 99-year leasehold on the territory from the date of any agreement. British forces would be free to come and go without restriction as to number or equipment (excluding nuclear forces).

(r) No new facilities would be established within the SBAs without the agreement of the Cyprus government. The upgrading of old facilities would be permitted so long as their nature is not changed (i.e. defensive systems could be replaced with more modern systems, yet should retain a similar range and be for defensive purposes only; runways could be repaved but not lengthened).

(s) Only British forces would be allowed to be permanently stationed in the SBAs. No NATO or other forces would be permitted to be permanently based in the SBAs. Visits by foreign forces to the SBAs would be subject to approval by both the NATO Council and the Cyprus government.

(t) Use of the SBAs in military operations would be subject to approval by the Cyprus government, excluding incidents of domestic strife requiring NATO intervention. In this case, NATO approval would be required.

(u) The British government shall inform the Cyprus government and NATO Council of any exercises taking place within the SBA territory or in the airspace or seaspace around, giving at least 48hrs notice. British exercises shall take place within prescribed boundaries in the territorial waters and airspace of Cyprus

(v) Current facilities outside the SBA areas would be retained on a permanent rolling 50 year lease from the Cyprus government. Cyprus will become a member of the ECHELON network, with the information gained from these facilities shared amongst its members. Should the Cypriot authorities violate the confidentiality of ECHELON, the sharing of information will cease with the permanent lease remaining in force. Upgrading of these facilities will be permitted, but they will be operated by a limited number of British troops only, no other forces will be permitted to operate in these areas.

(w) The 1960 Treaty of Guarantee would be abolished, including the sections describing the rights of British forces outside the SBAs. British forces would no longer have immediate right of use of international ports, airports and the road networks linking the bases without the consent of the Cyprus government and NATO.

(x) Movement of units between the SBAs of larger than 100 men, or comprising heavy weapons between bases would be subject to 48hrs notice given to both the Cyprus government and the NATO Council. These movements would be escorted by observers from the Civil Guard.

2. Related Implementation guarantees

(a) Turkish and Greek forces will begin immediate withdrawal from the island, monitored and supervised by members of the CYSTFOR. CYSTFOR will be responsible for the maintenance of order in areas vacated by these forces. Full force withdrawal shall take place within 3 months of the operation of this agreement, according to a timetable established by NATO Joint Command - Naples. Any forces unable to carry out immediate withdrawal shall return to prescribed base areas (at least 10km distant from the CS boundaries), subject to monitoring by CYSTFOR.

(b) Failure of Turkish and Greek forces to withdraw according to the established timetable will result in temporary suspension of their membership of the political section of the NATO alliance, pending compliance.

(c) Failure of Turkish-Cypriot and Greek-Cypriot forces to withdraw in accordance with this agreement will result in the immediate confiscation of all weapons systems and immediate exclusion from the selection process for the Cyprus Civil Guard.

So... that's it so far, thanks and well-done if you've managed to read to this point. I appreciate it's very lengthy and detailed, but if this forum is going to get anywhere, I think we need to go into this sort of depth, as the devil is always in the detail.

Any responses welcome, so long as they're constructive and don't just dismiss or welcome out of hand.
User avatar
cannedmoose
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4279
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:06 pm
Location: England

Postby boulio » Sat Mar 19, 2005 7:11 pm

since nato would have such involvment in cyprus moose maybe the british base would become a nato base,there for everyone looses something even they british,just a thought and i think maybe the base would be just one in nuber at 1%.
boulio
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:45 am

Postby cannedmoose » Sat Mar 19, 2005 7:29 pm

boulio wrote:since nato would have such involvment in cyprus moose maybe the british base would become a nato base,there for everyone looses something even they british,just a thought and i think maybe the base would be just one in nuber at 1%.


Thanks boulio, my rationale in maintaining the British bases was as follows:

1. Rather than permanent sovereignty, the SBAs should become leasehold and reduced by almost half in size (as proposed under Annan Plan 5).
2. Wherever possible I was trying to not have a permanent NATO base in Cyprus. In my proposal I do indeed have a joint HQ, but this would mostly be administrative rather than a military outpost per se. Transforming the SBAs into NATO outposts would no doubt raise the ire of some as it would mean US forces would have rights to be stationed there.
3. My NATO proposals have also tried to make sure that Cyprus would have big say in regional affairs, on a par with her larger neighbour(s). Also, having the regional command HQ would mean that a lot of expertise could be passed onto Cypriot commanders and the establishment of the HQ would require substantial investment in the region from the alliance as a whole (not just in cash terms, but as a front line area in the Middle East).

As for having one base, I agree that two is excessive. But the British will not be willing to give up both, particularly since one contains the airbase and the other a major spying facility. By absolving sovereignty and all permanent rights to the SBAs, as well as the reduction in size, this is the British sacrifice element in the proposal.
User avatar
cannedmoose
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4279
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:06 pm
Location: England

Postby insan » Sat Mar 19, 2005 8:12 pm

cannedmoose,

How the CS senates and the Senate of Federal State will work? Can you elaborate a bit please?
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby cannedmoose » Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:17 pm

insan wrote:cannedmoose,

How the CS senates and the Senate of Federal State will work? Can you elaborate a bit please?


Sorry I haven't replied to this yet insan, I'm flat out with work both for Uni and at home (turfing my garden ready for the summerImage). Hopefully I'll have this ready for your comments in a couple of days time. I'm just disappointed no-one else has commented in the meantime.Image
User avatar
cannedmoose
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4279
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:06 pm
Location: England

Postby Alexis » Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:29 pm

Canned moose,

First off hello. I'm new to the forum, although I have been following many of the threads for a while :)

Going back to your post on the SBAs, I was under the impression that the spy facilities and air base were both in Akrotiri not Dhekelia.
Isn't Dhekelia an Army base rather than an RAF base?
Also, I though the spy facility relied on the large radar facility on Olympus?
If this is the case, could the Dhekelia base not be released?
Even if this is not the case, could room not be found in Akrotiri to
accommodate the spy facility? No disrespect to an army people but most of the friction between squaddies and locals seems to come from the Dhekelia base.

Your thoughts?
Alexis
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:36 pm
Location: UK

Postby Saint Jimmy » Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:45 pm

Cannedmoose, no time right now for a full evaluation, but here's just a couple of comments on the first heading (Government).
1) GC concerns have been voiced on the cumbersomeness of the government structure with three separate senates. How does the possibility of essentially one senate (the Federal one), with senators from each CS forming the CS senate sound? This would bring about a) alignment of CS and Federal decision-making and b) less senators :lol: Also, it would, I think, eliminate the possibility of different outlooks in CSs' and Federal senates in law-making (in theory, if GC CS senators are elected by GCs, and conservatives/nationalists are elected, and Federal senators are elected from a joint ticket - GCs and TCs together, as in 'combinations instead of persons' - , there could be a long-term clash, perhaps resulting in ineffective law-making, as joint tickets are more likely to bring liberals to power).

2) I especially like this 'Federal Zone' concept. I think it's a good idea, it solves a lot of problems.
User avatar
Saint Jimmy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:29 pm
Location: Leeds, U.K.

Postby garbitsch » Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:14 pm

cannedmoose, the senates for the constituent states are not necessary. They will be both waste of time and money. And I cannot understand why Famagusta is a Federal territory? I think, Varosha and surrounding areas should be given to the south and the rest should stay in the north. The port can be a federal territory though. For the Akamas, give it back to Greeks!! :wink:
User avatar
garbitsch
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 2:21 am
Location: UK, but originally from Cyprus

Re: Draft Security Framework for post-solution Cyprus

Postby Alexandros Lordos » Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:30 pm

Hi again Cannedmoose (and also everyone else). I've had a slight medical emergency over the last two weeks, which kept me away from my computer, but everything is back in order now. Congratulations for a very interesting proposal :)

In detail:

cannedmoose wrote:
The proposed Cyprus would have a bizonal, federal structure, with two Constituent States (CS) and joint Federal Zones at the following locations:

1. Lefkosia/Lefkoşa, including the old Nicosia International Airport area
2. Ammoxostos/Gazimağusa, including the port area
3. Karpass, including the religious site at Apostolos Andreas (which would become a designated National Park area)
4. Akamas (which would similarly become a designated National Park area)
5. Hala Sultan Tekke, within the current boundaries of the religious area
6. The following ports and airports (within their current boundaries): Pafos International Airport; Larnaka International Airport; Lemessos Port area; Larnaka Port area; Ercan International Airport; Kyrenia Port.


I absolutely agree and support what you are trying to do with the map. Your map is a very good adaptation of the Belgian model, and also very sensitive to the realities of Cyprus. Personally, I find it about 1000 times better than the Annan Plan map.

Have you given any thought yet about the voting rights and the day-to-day administration of people living within the Federal zone? Who will they be voting for? Who will be in charge of their health, industry etc.? How will they participate in the elections for the Federal Government? These are issues that have been vexing me, and I still haven't worked out an answer. Does anybody know how they do it in Belgium?

cannedmoose wrote:
Presidency: The Presidency would be a purely ceremonial position, lacking full executive powers. The President would assume Presidency over the Southern Constituent State, with the Vice-President taking the same role in the Northern Constituent State. The positions will be elected from within the CS Senate, subject to approval by majority vote in the CS Chambers.


Hmm, I can't see why you have given up on the Presidential Council, I thought it was one of the few positive aspects of the Annan Plan. If the Presidency will be ceremonial, where will the executive powers of the Federal Government be vested?

cannedmoose wrote:
Security

This is something that I feel is complete and would welcome detailed feedback on


OK, I will read this in detail later and let you know my thoughts. At a first glance, it seems like an excellent fleshing out of the NATO approach to solving the security issue. As I have already said before, I suspect that one would have to plough through many prejudices and strongly felt popular sentiments, before any NATO based proposal would be accepted. But this is not meant to dishearten you. I will examine your proposal carefully, and, if you like, test it with the public in my next survey.

Once more, congratulations for some excellent work! I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Alexandros Lordos
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:41 pm

Re: Draft Security Framework for post-solution Cyprus

Postby erolz » Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:00 pm

Alexandros Lordos wrote:Hi again Cannedmoose (and also everyone else). I've had a slight medical emergency over the last two weeks, which kept me away from my computer, but everything is back in order now. Congratulations for a very interesting proposal :)


Great to have you back Alexandros. :)
erolz
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Girne / Kyrenia

Next

Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests