S/PV.2230 Security Council

I should like to inform the members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Cyprus, Greece and Turkey, in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda. In accordance with the usual practice, I propose, with theconsent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mavrommatis (Cyprus), Mr. Katapodis .(Greece) and Mr. Eralp (Turkey) took places at the Council table.

I should like to recall that, in the course of. the consultations which took place yesterday, -members of the Council agreed that the Council should extend an invitation to Mr. Nail Atalay under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. If I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Council decides to invite Mr. Atalay under rule 39. It was so decided.

Members of the Council have before them the report by the Secretary-General on the United Nations operation in Cyprus for the period 1 December 1979 to 31 May 1980 [S/Z3972 and AddJ]. Members of the Council also have before them the text of a draft resolution [S/13993], which has been prepared in the course of consultations. 4. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution. Unless I hear any objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the vote now. A vote was taken by show of hands. The draft resolution was adopted ey 14 votes to none (resolution 472 (1980)). One member (China) did not participate in the voting.

I now call on the Secretary- General, who wishes to make a statement.

The Council has just adopted a resolution extending once again the stationing of the Unite’d Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) and requesting me to continue my mission of good offices. In this connexion, I deem it fitting to give the Council a brief account of developments over the past fortnight relating to my efforts to bring about a resumption of the intercommunal talks. 7. In my report of 3 June [S/13972], I mentioned that I had asked Mr. Perez de CuCllar, Under-Secretary-General for Special Political Affairs, to undertake on my behalf a visit to Cyprus for consultations with the two sides in the framework of my mission of good offices. I stated that the purpose of the visit would be to clarify the situation as regards the difficulties that stood in the way of a resumption of the negotiating process .in Cyprus. Mr. P&z de CuCllar returned from his mission yesterday and has reported to me in detail of his efforts. 8. Mr. Perez de Cueliar arrived in Nicosia on 5 June and held intensive high-level consultations there with both parties during the period from 6 to 8 June. He proceeded afterwards to visit Ankara and then Athens for consultations at the ministerial level in Turkey and Greece, as both countries are interested parties. The 10. Neither party accepted this suggestion in full. The Turkish Cypriot side accepted the opening statement but maintained that neither party should voice any reservations to it. The Greek Cypriot side would only accept the opening statement with amendments. Alternatively, they offered to resume the talks simply on the basis of the 19 May 1979 accord [S/13369, para. 511. 11. In the course of his consultations last week with leaders of the two parties in Cyprus, Mr. P&ez de CuelIar explored the possibility of resolving the impasse by the following arrangement, which is, of course, a procedural arrangement. -My representative would deliver the opening statement I have .just mentioned. The interlocutors would then remain silent. My representative would then point out in addition that the statement represented the understanding of the Secretary-General, and that both sides would have the opportunity to express their opinion in depth about certain concepts in the context of the discussion related to the constitutional and territorial aspects. 12. At ,approximately 1 a.m., on 7 June, President Kyprianou informed Mr. Perez de. CuCllar that the Greek Cypriot side had decided to accept that arrangement. When calling on Mr. Denktas late on the morning of 7 June, Mr. Perez de CuCllar was informed that the Turkish Cypriot side, having seriously considered the proposed arrangements, now felt unable to accept the additional remark by my representative. In the Turkish Cypriot view that remark would have the effect -of diminishing the significance -of the opening statement by introducing de facto reservations. The Turkish Cypriot side continued to accept without reservations the opening statement by my representative, to which the two interlocutors would refrain from responding. This procedure, omitting the additional remark, continues to be unacceptable to the Greek Cypriots. 13. I shall of course pursue the mission of good offices which the Council has again entrusted to me. I hold to the opinion that the intercommunal talks, if properly used, still represent the best available method of negotiating a political settlement of the Cyprus problem. It is my earnest hope that the parties .on

I now call on the representative of Cyprus.

Mr. President, I should like at the outset to extend to you the heartfelt congratulations of my delegation on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of June. During the last two weeks we have been given ample opportunity to admire your many skills and your handling of the consultations that preceded the adoption today of resolution 472 (1980) as further proof of the fact that the conduct of the Council’s business is in very safe and competent hands. 16. I should also like to thank you and through you all the members of the Council, not only for atfording me the opportunity to address the Council but also for renewing the mandate of UNFICYP, which renewal was essential, given all the circumstances still prevailing in Cyprus as a result of the complete disregard by Turkey of all the United Nations resolutions. 17. The resolution just adopted calls for the resumption of the intercommunal talks in a “continuing, sustained and result-oriented manner, avoiding any delay”- words that were inserted upon our insistence a whole year ago, and yet those talks have never even begun. And this has been the tragedy of the Cyprus drama ever since the invasion and occupation of Cyprus in 1974. 18. I shall now attempt to give the chronicle of events and efforts that have, unfortunately, not led to the resumption of the talks, and the reasons therefor. 19. Following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 34130 and Security’ Council resolution 458 (1979), the Government of Cyprus made it abundantly clear to the Secretary-General and to all concerned that it favoured the immediate resumption of the dialogue before the deadline set by the aforesaid.resolution, 34/30, rather than any other mechanism which could also prove to be at least a pressure leverage in the same direction. To achieve such a resumption, it was of course necessary to overcome the dif&ulties engendered by the interpolation into the, talks and the existing agreements of two unacceptable pretonditions, namely bi-zonality and security; 20. Permit me to pause for a moment and state that the aforesaid two notions are not merely innocuous terminology in: the absence of a better nomenclature but; in view of the interpretation given to them time and again by their proponents, they have become the resultant of the basic differences in the approaches of the two sides. When we reach consensus ad idem “In my view, contentious issues such as ‘bizonality’ and the ‘security of the Turkish Cypriot community’ could only be dealt with productively within the framework of the intercommunal talks, as part of negotiating the constitutional and territorial aspects. I therefore urged the parties to resume the talks and proceed as soon as possible to the consideration of concrete matters with a view to achieving progress.” Could there be a statement clearer than this? And yet both Mr. Denktas and the Foreign Minister of Turkey persist in their untenable position on these two issues. 21. I ask the indulgence of the Council members as I repeat here much of what is given in the aforesaid report of the Secretary-General as well as in a previous report of the Secretary-General of 2 April 1980,’ submitted in pursuance of General Assembly resolution 34130. 22. Our first gesture of good will and genuine interest in the resumption of the talks took the form of a visit by Foreign Minister Rolandis to the Secretary-General in New York in early February 1980, when not only did we explore the ground for such a resumption but also offered, inter aliu, assistance to the Turkish Cypriot community. This was followed by certain ideas of the Secretary-General which we accepted, though not without initial hesitation. We were given to understand, at least initially, that they were offered on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. We took them, but the other side left them. And yet we agreed to receive Mr. Perez de CuCllar in Cyprus in a further effort to bridge the gap that came in the wake of the takethem-or-leave-them ideas. And yet the Turkishside rejected even the idea of such a visit at that time. Even on the eve of the expiration of the 31 March deadline, the President of the Republic made a renewed effort to have the talks resumed, but this again met with Turkish opposition. 23. Following the failure of the attempts in March, and in view of our respect for the contents of the last paragraph of the Secretary-General’s report of 2 April, we did not press for any other decisions immediately but, instead, gave a further period.of time for renewed efforts by the. Secretary-General. We reacted similarly when Mr. Hugo Gobbi took over as Special Representative of the Secretary-General, following Mr. Galindo Pohl’s relinquishing of his post on 30 April. 24. Hoping against hope, we opted to believe that the Turkish side had adopted a new and constructive attitude when Mr. Perez de~CuCllar’s visit to Cyprus 25. Everything I have said points to one direction and one direction only: that it is high time for the Council to demand the resumption of the talks without preconditions and simply on the basis of the 19 May 1979 agreement. We are ready to do so today, as already repeatedly stated. 26. The President of the General Assembly, wh.o was given by Assembly resolution 34/30 a specific mandate for the appointment of the members of an ad hoc committee on Cyprus in case of a lack of progress by 3 1 March, has received from us ample proof of both our restraint and our responsible attitude regarding the talks. That is well known to the Secretariat. In the light of the rejection by the Turkish side of the latest formula of the Secretary-General, I need hardly remind the members of the Council that the decision under the Assembly resolution to which I have referred is still pending. 27. I should now like to turn to two other serious, indeed tragic, aspects of the Cyprus question. 28. The first concerns the situation created by the continuing implantation of colonist-settlers from Turkey in the occupied areas of my country. That is but a scheme intended to bring about by force a change in the age-long demographic character of Cyprus, in furtherance of illicit and well-known designs against the non-aligned Republic of Cyprus. Thus, almost six years after the invasion, one third of the population of Cyprus are still prevented from returning’ to their homes and lands, which are occupied by settlers from Turkey and others, whilst the owners continue to be refugees in their own country. Even more appalling is the fact that we keep hearing threats that Famagusta, the return to which is a priority item under the IO-point agreement of 19 May. 1979, may, under various pretexts and devices, also be colonized. It should not be overlooked that the victims of this colonization policy of Turkey are not only the thousands of expelled indigenous Greek Cypriot inhabitants but also, and equally, the Turkish Cypriots. 29. It is my earnest hope that the Security Council will not lose sight of the gravity of this situation created by Turkey’s continuing colonization policies, which run counter to every basic norm of international 30. The agony and pain of the families of the missing persons continue in the absence of any progress towards the appointment of an effective investigatory body to begin work to trace and account for them. It is indeed deplorable that, even on that purely humanitarian issue, the Turkish side has chosen to adopt a totally negative attitude, adamantly refusing to abide by the agreement on the missing persons, concluded on 19 May 1979 in the presence of Mr. Waldheim and referred to in earlier reports of the Secretary-General. Moreover, the Turkish side has again rejected certain new ideas proposed by the Secretary-General in December last, ideas which we have again accepted in tolo. 31. Six years after the invasion, the families of the missing still do not know whether their loved ones are alive or dead. Am I not justified in asking: how much more agony and pain will those families have to suffer before Turkey and the Turkish-Cypriot leadership can relent and decide to honour the agreement to trace and account for our missing persons? I hope that the United Nations and world opinion will exert further pressure on them so that results can be obtained very soon. 32. Six frustrating months have elapsed since the last meeting of the Council on this subject, and if Turkish intransigence persists and military occupation continues, along with efforts to consolidate fairs accomplis, then the Council will be duty bound to consider effective measures for the solution of the Cyprus problem, principally by ensuring compliance with its own decisions as well as the decisions of the General Assembly. 33. Before concluding, I should very much like to express once again our warm thanks to the Secretary- General for his continued efforts to obtain a solution of the Cyprus problem. His keen personal interest is greatly appreciated by the Government and people of Cyprus. Our thanks go also to all his extremely able colleagues, Messrs. Urquhart, Perez de Cuellar, Gobbi, Sherry, Gorge and Picco; and, for obvious reasons, I should like to single out for mention Ambassador Galindo Pohl, who retired on 30 April, and Mr. Hugo Gobbi, who during his short tenure in Cyprus has amply demonstrated his qualities by working towards the creation of conditions which, given the necessary good will, could have led to the resumption of the talks. I plead with Ambassador Perez de Cutllar not to be disheartened by the lastminute setback during his most important trip to my country, and I ask him to persevere until the Secretary- General, he himself and the whole team achieve success. Appreciation is also rightly due to the Commander, the officers and the men of UNFICYP

The next speaker is the representative of Greece, on whom I now call.

Allow me, first of all, Mr. President, to extend to you the warmest congratulations of my delegation upon your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of June. These congratulations are addressed not only to a distinguished, experienced and wise diplomat, whose contribution to the work of the Council has been outstanding, but also to the representative of a country to which mine is bound by ties of long-standing and close friendship, reinforced by their common commitment to the ideals of peace, freedom, international security and co-operation. 36. It is, I suppose, with a feeling of frustration that the Security Council is meeting once again to renew the mandate of UNFICYP for another six months -frustration owing to the fact that, despite the untiring efforts of the Secretary-General and his colleagues and the readiness of the Government of Cyprus, the other side persists in refusing to sit at the negotiating table. This refusal became obvious once again during the recent mission of Under-Secretary-General Perez de Cutllar in Nicosia, when, as Mr. Waldheim just informed the Council, Mr. Denktag turned down the latest proposals of the Secretariat, which had been accepted by the Government of Cyprus. At the same time, both the Turkish Cypriot leadership and the Turkish Government continue to disregard along series of United Nations resolutions which call for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of the Republic of Cyprus, the return of the 200,000 refugees to their homes and respect for the independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic. 37. Because of the intransigence of the Turkish Cypriot side, no progress has been made towards implementing the high-level agreement of 19 May 1979, the signing of which was hailed with such great expectations by all those concerned with the fate of the unfortunate, divided island of Cyprus. Yet that agreement was signed without reservations by the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community. And, after all, it does not purport to solve the many and intricate problems facing the Republic of Cyprus today; it simply constitutes a framework for discussing those problems in a spirit of good will and mutual compromise. 38. Why, then, does the Turkish Cypriot side try to prejudge the outcome of the negotiations by raising a priori fundamental issues, which would determine the nature of the new constitution of the Republic and the fate of one third of its population, who, since the Turkish invasion of 1974, have lived as refugees, away from their homes? It is not only we who urge the Turkish Cypriot leaders to start negotiating without pre-conditions. The Secretary-General himself has “I also considered that contentious issues such as ‘bi-zonaiity’ and the ‘security of the Turkish Cypriot community* could be dealt with productively within the framework of the talks, as part of negotiating concretely the constitutional and territorial aspects in accordance with the 19 May 1979 accord and the 12 February 1977 guidelines. In my view, this approach remains valid.” 39. Frankly, we cannot understand why the Turkish Cypriot leaders are so reluctant to resume the talks. Are they overawed by the negotiating skill of their Greek Cypriot counterparts? Do they reaiize that some of their positions are such that impartial observers will have no difficulty in apportioning the blame, should the talks fail? Or do they honestly believe that by their intransigence they can intimidate the Government of Cyprus into acceding to demands which would lead to the virtual partition of the island? 40. The position of the Greek Government as regards the problem of Cyprus is clear, consistent and, we believe, helpful. The solution to that problem resides in the implementation of the many resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, which were ail adopted by overwhelming majorities and have a common basis: respect for the Charter and its fundamental principles. Furthermore, my Government is convinced that an equitable solution can be reached only through negotiations between the two communities, without outside interference. And finally, we believe that these negotiations should be conducted without pre-conditions, on the basis of the agreement of May 1979. 41. Until a final settie~ment has been reached in Cyprus, until all foreign occupation forces have left the Republic and until the two communities have freely laid the foundations of a new, just and lasting relationship, the presence of UNFICYP will be necessary if only in order to reassure the victims of the invasion and to remind them of the continued concern of the United Nations for their security. My Govemment therefore subscribes to the renewal of the mandate of the Force for another six months. 42. 3efore concluding, I should like once more, on behalf of my Government and my delegation, to express our most sincere thanks and our deep gratitude to the commanding officer, the officers and the men of UNFICYP for their unfailing dedication to their important task and the exemplary way in which they are carrying it out. Our thanks also go to the Secretary- General and his able assistants, both in New York and in Cyprus, for their untiring and imaginative efforts to keep alive the prospects of a negotiated settlement. And I take this opportunity to express our special appreciation to Mr. Gaiindo Pohi, for the excellent job he did during his two pars as the Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Cyprus. 44. Mr. ATALAY: Mr. President, I should like to thank you and each member of this body for having given me the opportunity of addressing the Council and of presenting the Turkish Cypriot view on the current state of the Cyprus .conflict. I am indeed grateful to you and to the other members of the Council for this opportunity. 45. Allow me also, on behalf of my Government and on my own behalf, to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General, to his staff in the Secretariat and in the field, and to those military and civilian personnel who have been involved in efforts to find a just and lasting solution to the Cyprus problem. Furthermore, I should like to thank Mr. Reynaido Galindo Pohi, who has completed his tour of duty as Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Cyprus. His patience and skill in the conduct of a very difficult task will never be forgotten by the Turkish Cypriot side. We wish him the best of happiness and success in his future endeavours. I take this opportunity also to welcome Mr. Hugo Gobbi as the new Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Cyprus and to assure him of our fullest co-operation in the difficult task that lies ahead of him. 46. The Council has just adopted resolution 472 (1980). It is most regrettable that the third preambuiar paragraph of that resolution makes a reference to the so-called-Government of Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriot side objects to the use of the term “Government of Cyprus”, which is simply an alias for the Greek Cypriot administration. Such a Government ceased to exist after the Greek Cypriot component of that bicommunal institution expelled its Turkish counterpart from the machinery of government by force of arms, in December 1%3. Since then two autonomous administrations have existed in the island, pending a final solution to the Cyprus problem. Furthermore, the existence of those two separate administrations in Cyprus was recognized in the Geneva Declaration of 30 July 1974 [S/11398], agreed to among the three guarantor States: Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom. Therefore, the reference to a non-existent entity in the resolution just adopted makes it completely unacceptable to us. The Government of the Turkish Federated State of Kibris has nevertheless declared its decision to give its consent to the extension of the mandate of UNFICYP until 15 December 1980. 47. The Secretary-General states, in paragraph 66 of his report, that “the continued presence of UNFICYP remains necessary. . . in creating the conditions in which the search for a peaceful settlement can go forward*‘. 48. The problem of Cyprus is a dispute between the two national communities-namely, the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots. This is a fact well known to the whole world. But, unfortunately, we observe that paragraph 52 of the report of the Secretary-General gives a different impression to an outside reader. In that paragraph, it sounds as if the Secretary- General further pursued his initiatives by consulting the Prime Minister of Turkey and the Greek Cypriot leader and ignoring the Turkish Cypriot side. Personally, I do not believe that the foregoing was the intention of the Secretary-General, in whose good faith and understanding of the issues involved we have full confidence. 49. It is most regrettable that the representative of the Greek Cypriot administration, unlawfully and unconstitutionally posing as the representative of the Government of Cyprus, has once again thought fit, in line with that administration’s declared policy of intemationalizing. the Cyprus problem-that is to say, making propaganda in all international forums-to abuse the machinery of the Security Council and to take up the valuable time of the Council by raising here today the so-called question of missing persons, the “question of refugees”, “suffering of the Greek Cypriots”, “question of colonization” and so on, for purposes of pure propaganda, well knowing that these outstanding humanitarian issues in Cyprus stem from a long history of troubles between the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot communities and are so closely interwoven with and form such a staple element of the Cyprus problem itself, that they can be effectively resolved only with the settlement of the Cyprus problem through intercommunal talks between the two national communities. Therefore, raising’these humanitarian problems in international forums, such as the Council, purely for their propaganda value is not only 50. I do not think I shall answer the accusations of the representative of Greece, and I doubt that they deserve any reply. I would remind him to reread my previous statement in the Council. 51. Now, coming to the intercommunal talks, I should like to present to the Council the views of the Turkish Cypriot side on the resumption of those taIks with a view to finding a just and lasting solution to the problem of Cyprus. In this connexion, my President, Mr. Denktag, after meeting with Mr. Perez de CuCllar, last Friday, 6 June, made the following statement to the press: “Mr. Perez de Cutllar and his colleagues are making explorations for the resumption of the Cyprus intercommunal talks, which have been recessed since last June. It should be recalled that, while the talks were under way last June, the Greek Cypriots broke them offand, as part of their annual campaign of misleading the world, they went to the Non-AIigned Conference and then to the United Nations General Assembly and extracted in our . absence a harmful resolution for Cyprus and ran away from the negotiations. “As a result of the initiatives by the Secretaty- General for the resumption of the intercommunal talks, last March the Turkish Cypriot side made it clear that, if the Secretary-General prepared a positive basis for the talks which would be binding on the parties, the Turkish Cypriot side would be prepared to resume the. talks immediately. And finally, on 30 March, as a further sign of good will, we stated that the talks could be resumed, if the parties did not put reservations and maintained silence on the opening statement to be delivered by the representative of the Secretary-General. This was yet a further display of good will on the part of the Turkish Cypriot side. The Greek Cypriot side, however, wanted to maintain the freedom to put reservations on the statement, and insisted on doing so, and thus the talks could not be resumed in March. And ever since, the Greek Cypriot side has been insisting on this. We continue to maintain our position of good will of-30 March and maintain the position that the parties should keep silent on the opening statement of the Secretary-General. If this is accepted, the talks can be resumed. “Since 30 March, the Greek Cypriots have unfortunately continued their inhuman economic embargo against the Turkish Cypriots. They continue to display their bad faith--against the Turkish Cypriot people and maintain their aggression against the Turkish Cypriot people by hiding behind the “In spite of these realities we are facing, we propose that the delivery of the statement of the Secretary-General be followed by silence by the parties in order not to bring up new points of dispute. We defend the view that, if this course is followed and if the dispute is not widened by putting reservations, the talks can be ‘resumed.” 52. The following day, Saturday, 7 June, after the latest round of talks held with Mr. Perez de C&liar, my President also said the following: “We have stated before and we repeat now, as the Turkish Cypriot co-founder of Cyprus, we are fighting for an equitable and balanced peace that will protect our rights, partnership, life and property against the Greek Cypriot community, which destroyed the peace in Cyprus and launched genocide for the extermination of the Turkish Cypriot people, has maintained this armed aggression for 11 years and continues to maintain ruthless economic aggression against us. “Greek Cypriots are playing with words in order to give the impression that they favour peace and talks. Through their strong propaganda machine they have managed to mislead the world for some time.*‘-Even as late as 8 June.-“However, it is essential to come to the conference table with the sincere intention of finding peace, and not playing with words. We have not yielded to the ploy of playing with words. We fully explained our cause to Mr. Perez de Cueliar, as he has said himself, in the efforts for the resumption of the talks. “Now, there is a danger: believing that they have scored a point, the Greek Cypriots may take a step too far. Then it becomes imperative for us, naturally, to take the necessary protective political measures. Thus, separation becomes more consolidated. The objective, however, is to find a realistic peace, and not the consolidation of separation. “At dinner last night, I had the opportunity to have a sincere and detailed discussion with Mr. Perez de Cuellar. I am pleased with these contacts. A phase is over. The formula put forward by Mr. Perez de Cueliar was strange and unnecessary, in that it completely eradicated the former formula on which the two sides could reach a compromise. . . . Anyway, we hope that efforts for the resumption of the intercommunal talks will continue, and that these efforts will yield a positive outcome in the near future .” 54. First, as I indicated on earlier occasions, once again I have to bring to the Council’s attention another recent attempt by the Greek Cypriot administration to curtail the freedom of travel of the Turkish people of Cyprus by preventing, through devious means, the aircraft rented by the Turkish. Cypriot Airlines from Sobelair of Belgium from making flights to and from the Turkish Federated State of Kibris. With that recent. attempt the Greek Cypriot side is undoubtedly aiming at one of the vital areas of the Turkish-Cypriot economy-transportation-and endeavouring to deal a fatal blow to it. 55. Secondly, Mr. Abraham Mildik, a Dutch national acting on behalf of the British firm, Nottingham Fruit Packers, has been gaoled for two months by a Greek Cypriot court for entering Cyprus through Ercan State Airport in the north, which the Greek Cypriot administration , masquerading as the “Government of Cyprus”, has declared illegal, together with all the other ports of entry situated in the north. 56. Thirdly, a Belgium company, Transair, was forced by the Greek Cypriot administration to cancel the reservations it had made for 1,000 tourists who were due to visit the Turkish Federated State of Kibris. 57. Fourthly, the Greek Cypriot administration continues to pose before the world as the “Government of Cyprus” and exploits this illegal status, which it usurped by force of arms in 1963 to its advantage and at the expense of the Turkish Cypriot community. This involves, among other things, the usurpation of practically all international and binational aid, including credits and loans, which is given to Cyprus for use by both communities, and the consequent deprivation of the Turkish Cypriot community of an equitable share in such assistance. 58. It should be noted that the inequitable distribution of foreign aid between the two Cypriot communities and the unilateral exploitation of such aid by the Greek Cypriots were among the prime causes of the wide economic gap that existed between the two communities prior to 1974. While at the time that only served to promote the isolation of the two communities from each other, it only serves today to perpetuate such isolation by making a peaceful solution in the island more difficult. It is a well-known fact that the Greek Cypriots, having failed to subjugate the Turkish community by brute force, are at present engaged in an intense economic and political campaign against the Turkish Cypriots with a view to bringing about their eventual collapse. Usurpation 59. Those are some of the cases to which I had to refer today. As a matter of fact, the target of these embargoes and this blockade is nothing but economic extermination. Extermination is not always carried out by means of the gallows and executions. Sometimes it takes the form of pushing a community to destruction by cutting off its links with the world and throwing it into isolation, just as the Greek side is trying to do to the Turkish Cypriot community. 60. Does the Council know that almost all tourism agencies refrain from organizing tours to northern Cyprus and shipping agencies refrain from calling at northern Cyprus ports? They all know that, if they act otherwise, they will be threatened by Greek Cypriot administration officials and their gangs and that their Governments will submit to this. 61. Such destructive activities, which are part of the overall economic embargo that has been imposed on the Turkish Cypriot people by the Greek Cypriot side since 1963, are in utter violation of the Denktap Kyprianou agreement of 19 May 1979, point 6 of which states that the two sides would “abstain from any action which might jeopardize the outcome of the talks, and special importance will be given to initial practical measures by both sides to promote good will, mutual confidence and the return to nqrmal conditions”. 62. Whereas the Turkish Cypriot people have exercised utmost care not to harm prospects for the resumption of the talks and have shown the necessary good will for reconciliation between the two peoples of Cyprus, the Greek Cypriot side has unfortunately been bent on destroying the Turkish Cypriot people politically and economically, in spite of the abovementioned agreement. 63. In conclusion, despite the political activities and economic embargoes against the Turkish Cypriots which the Greek side continues to promote at all levels, the Turkish Cypriot side is ready to resume the intercommunal talks in accordance with the agreements reached at the 1977 Denktas-Makarios highlevel meeting and the 1979 Denktas-Kyprianou highlevel meeting. We accepted unconditionally the text of the statement to be made by the representative of the Secretary-General. But the Greek Cypriot side wanted to add to that statement some pre-conditions which would change the meaning and remove the value of the whole statement. We asked them-and I ask my counterpart now-to abandon their pre- 64. Becauseof the negative attitude of the Kymianou tigime, many opport&ities have been lost. Very recently, on 24 May. the Greek Communist Party, Akel, delivered a strong attack against the policies of Mr. Kyprianou and his Administration and accused him personally of acts of commission or omission, among them, failure to activate the intercommunal talks. Even Akel believes that opportunities have existed for resumption of the intercommunal talks, under the auspices of the Secretary-General, since August last, but it says: “Unsuitable handling, lack of courage and indecision on the part of the Greek Cypriot leadership and various expediencies had the result of nonfruition of the possibilities for the resumption of the talks.” In that statement, Akel quotes from the Secretary- General’s report to the Security Council, according to which Mr. Waldheim told Mr. Kyprianou that Mr. Denktag had accepted the proposals of August last, and Akel,says that further opportunities appeared in February, March and April this year which, however, were not utilized. 65. Both the Kyprianou regime and the Greek- Cypriot people of southern Cyprus have to accept this reality and the fact that this realistic approach of the Turkish-Cypriot people, calling for a lasting and honourable solution based on the equal partnership of the Turkish and Greek communities of the island in an independent, non-aligned, bicommunal and bizonal federal republic without giving either party the right to persecute or exploit the other, deserves a serious and reasonable approach in good will. 66. Before making their final decision on this appeal, the Greeks will have to try to guess and to evaluate the possible developments that can take place in the political scene. in the island in case of a continuation of the present deadlock in the talks, a deadlock that has been intentionally created by the Greeks-in order to be able dramatically to blame the Turkish side for the failure of Mr. Perez de CuCllar’s mission. This is a repetition of the annual Greek campaign and preparations prior to every General Assembly session since 1974. B-ut the Greeks have to understand that, like everything else in the.world, the good will and patience of the Turkish Cypriots have a limit. Nobody has a right to expect the continuation of the one-sided Turkish understanding and sacrifices in the island for the sake of the realiiation of the Greek dream -Megalo Idea and enosis. 67. My final ,word is to appeal to the Greek-Cypriot leadelship to accept unconditionally Mr. Waldheim’s text of 28 March and return to the intercommunal talks. This is up to them.

Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure to extend to you my warmest congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. In doing so, I wish tounderline the satisfaction we feel in seeing as President of the Council the representative of a country with which Turkey traditionally enjoys cordial and constructive relations in all fields. I hasten to add how grateful we are to you for the discretion, objectivity and wisdom you have displayed during the consultations. 71. The situation in Cyprus has been described once again in the Secretary-General’s recent report, on the basis of which the Council is today reviewing the situation in Cyprus, as being calm through the period under review. We do believe that continuing calm and tranquillity in the island would facilitate the search for a negotiated settlement between the two Cypriot communities. We also note from the report that, in the course of-the consultations between the two sides .within the framework of his mission of good ofices, the Secretary-General has been successful in narrowing the gap between the two divergent positions to the point where the only remaining obstacle in the way of a resumption of the negotiating process at present is one side’s continuing insistence of expressing reservations in one way or another to the text of the opening statement that was suggested to the parties. As amatter of fact, after the present version of the opening statement had been presented to the parties on 28 March, President Denktag demonstrated once again his side’s willingness to negotiate by announcing, on 30 March, that the Turkish Federated State of Kibris accepted without any reservations the suggested text as it stood and that, if the Greek Cypriot side also acceptrd them without any conditions or reservations, in other words, simply by listening to the text.and maintaining silence once it. had been read out by the representative-of the Secretary-General-the intercommunal talks. could resume within a few days. However, this constructive attitude of the Turkish Cypriot side-which it still abides by-has yet to be reciprocated. 72. My Government has consistently held the view that the key to progress towards a comprehensive 73. Having made these comments of a general nature, I should like to make a clarification for the record with regard to a particular paragraph of the report. In paragraph 52, there is a reference to an exchange of views between the Prime Minister of Turkey and the Secretary-General that took place during a fortuitous meeting in Belgrade on the sad occasion of the funeral of President Tito. However, the context in which that fortuitous meeting is mentioned in paragraph 52 generates a misleading impression as to who the parties are to the intercommunal negotiating process in Cyprus. I should like to stress once again the fact that the counterpart to the Greek Cypriot community and to its leader, Mr. Kyprianou, is the Turkish Cypriot community and that the consultations designed to explore the possibilities for a resumption of the intercommunal talks are carried out with the two Cypriot communities and their leaders. However, I am gratified to be able to state that the Secretary- General was gracious enough to explain to me the circumstances of that chance meeting, and I am convinced that the paragraph in question was not intended to throw a false light on the problem. 74. I should also like to say a few words about the consultations that took place almost a week ago with the two communities in Cyprus. This matter has been taken up by the representative of the Greek Cypriot administration and the representative of the Turkish Federated State of Kibris and was extremely well outlined in the opening statement of the Secretary- General. I shall not go into detail. 75. The Council must be familiar with the fact that the Under-Secretary-General, Ambassador Perez de Cdllar, set out for Cyprus for the purpose of consulting with the two parties in an effort to iron out the only remaining obstacle standing in the way of a resumption of the intercommunal talks. As we all know, that obstacle is the Greek Cypriot side’s insistence on expressing reservations to the text of the opening statement. It has been reported to us that Ambassador Perez de CuelIar’s mission to Cyprus was not successful in inducing the Greek Cypriot leadership to take up the same position as the Turkish Cypriot side has done and to accept the proposed opening statement 76. During the thirty-fourth session of the General Assembly, I had this to say at the plenary meeting on 19 November 1979: “The record of the intercommunal talks shows very clearly that it has tiever been possible to engage in serious negotiations during the summer preceding General Assembly proceedings. This fact certainly cannot be explained by the need of the negotiating parties in Cyprus for summer vacations. Nor is it a mere coincidence that the two major breakthroughs in the intercommunal negotiations have taken place in the winter and spring, well in advance of General Assembly sessions.“* I sincerely wish that this view would not be confirmed by the developments to take place this summer. 77. My delegation believes that it is not the time to engage in a vitriolic campaign and an attempt to put the blame on one party or the other. On the contrary, it is hight time for the two communities in Cyprus to get down to serious negotiations with a view to exploring the avenues conducive to a just and lasting settlement of the problem that still eludes us. Mr. P&z de CuCllar’s mission to Cyprus was merely an episode in the entire process of consultations with the two parties which we earnestly hope will continue. 78. Turning now to resolution 472 (1980), which the Council has just adopted, I should like to explain the position of my Government with regard to it. 79. In the third .preambular paragraph there is, as in previous resolutions on the same subject, an irrele- 80. In its operative part, the resolution first gives UNFICYP a mandate for another six months. We concur in that extension, having heard Mr. Nail Atalay ,’ representative of the Turkish Federated State of Kibris, who informed the Council of the consent of his Government in that respect. It should, however, be noted that Mr. Atalay has once again underlined the necessity of reviewing the mandate of the Forcz, as established in 1964 in order to adapt it to the circumstances now prevailing in Cyprus and to the new and redyced dimensions of the problem. 81. Paragraphs 2 and 3 relate to the intercommunal talks and the continuation of the mission of good offices of the Secretary-General, respectively. As has already been stated on numerous occasions, the Turkish Government fully supports the mission of good offices of the Secretary-General. My Govemment is determined to encourage all efforts designed to achieve a viable solution within the framework of the Denktas-Makarios four-point guidelines [S/Z2323 of30 April 1977, para. 51, and the Denkta$-Kyprianou lo-point agreement, which, in:our view, have laid the foundations for a. solution based on the fundamental and legitimate rights of the two communities within an independent, non-aligned, bicommunal and bizonal federal republic. The Turkish Government welcomed and supported, and still welcomes and supports, the position of the Government of the Turkish Federated State of Kibris which, in its desire to find a speedy solution to the Cyprus problem through intercommunal talks, has announced that it is ready to get down to the intercommunal: dialogue with the best intentions and to that effect has accepted the Secretary- General’s suggested opening statement without any objection, as it is. We ardently hope that the position of the Turkish-Federated State-of Kibris will eventually open the way for the resumption of the intercommunal talks on. the basis of that opening statement in which both communities reaffirmed the validity of the Detitas-Makarios and Denktas-Kyprianou agreements. The Turkish Government continues to believe that-Turkey and Greece should assist and encourage the two national communities in Cyprus to fitid a just and lasting solution of their problem through intercommunal -talks. 82. 3efore concluding, I should like totake this opportunity to perform a pleasant duty by highly commending the Secretary-General for his. untiiing efforts in connexion with the United-Nations-activities 83. Our thanks go also to the Under-Secretaries- General, Mr. Brian Urquhart and Mr. Perez de CuelIar, and to Mr. George Sherry and Mr. Picco and their staff for the devotion and competence they have shown in the discharge of their respective duties. 84. I should be remiss if I did not strike a special note of gratitude to Ambassador Galindo Pohl, who relinquished his post as the Secretary-General’s special representative in Cyprus on 30 April. During his two-year tenure, he has distinguished himself by his remarkable diplomatic tact and his ability to inspire confidence in all parties concerned and has made aconsiderable contribution to the cause of peace in Cyprus. 85; My Government has welcomed the appointment of Ambassador Hugo Gobbi as special Representative of the Secretary-General. We know that he has distinguished himself both as a diplomat and as,a lawyer, and we are confident that he will carry out his new assignment with success. 86. I should like to express once again the appreciation of my Government to the Member States. which have contributed to UNFICYP. Last but not least, I wish to thank the Force Commander, Major-General James J. Quinn, and the officers and men of UNFICYP for the competence they have shown in the discharge of their duties. 87. May I now crave the indulgence of the Council to say a word of farewell. As I am due to retire from the Foreign Service. next month, this meeting of the Council will, barring unforeseen consequences, be the last occasion on which I shall be representing my country in this august body. I would therefore like to say a word of farewell, as well as to express my thanksfor the understanding shownby present and past members of the Council on the various problems with which my country has been faced. 88. I have the honour of having been associated with the United Nations since the San Francisco Conference in 1945, which I attended as a second secretary on our delegation. Having served for a non-consecutive period of nearly eight years as Permanent Representative, it is a source of satisfaction for me to round off a long career in this prestigious body, which, in spite of its shortcomings, still remains the only hope of bringirg peace, security, economic development and mutual understanding to the peoples of the world. 89. Farewell, thanks once again, and may the Council continue to be guided in its deliberations by a sense.. of

The delegation of the Soviet Union did not object to the Council’s extending the stationing of the United Nations Forces in Cyprus for a further six-month period inasmuch as the Government of the Republic of Cyprus had given its consent to that extension. It is also our understanding that the financing of those forces in Cyprus wilI continue to be based upon voluntary contributions . 91. In connexion with the decision just taken by the Council, the Soviet delegation would like to confirm the position of principle of the Soviet Union on the question of a settlement in Cyprus. 92. From the very beginning of the Cyprus crisis the Soviet Union has firmly supported, and continues to support, the solution of the Cyprus question on the basis of ensuring the. genuine independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus and strict observance of its policy of nonalignment. We are in favour of the withdrawal of all foreign troops and the elimination of all foreign military bases situated there. The Soviet Union considers that a settlement with regard to Cyprus should ensure the demilitarization of the island. 93. The Soviet Union vigorously condemns foreign intervention in the internal’ affairs of Cyprus and opposes any .attempts to infringe the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus and to resolve the question of Cyprus behind the backs of its people to the detriment of its vital interests and to suit external imperialist forces. 94. An end must be put to any manoeuvres designed to exploit the fact that the situation in Cyprus remains unresolved in order to subvert the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the State of Cyprus so as to impose upon the Cypriots plans and decisions entirely alien to them. The two national communities in Cyprus should be given the opportunity themselves to decide the internal arrangements of their State, reasonable account being taken of the interests and rights of both the Greek and the Turkish community, without any outside interference. The earliest possible resumption of the intercommunal dialogue in a spirit of mutual understanding and good will could play a positive role in this regard. The possible positive results of the intercommunal talks should be consolidated either in decisions of the Security Council or by means of the convening of an international conference within the framework of the United Nations. We remain convinced that the convening of such a conference could 95. The Soviet Union believes that the United Nations should play a decisive part in a Cyprus settlement, and we support implementation in full of the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly on Cyprus, which lay down the fundamental principles for a just settlement of the Cyprus problem and stress the inadmissibility of foreign intervention in the internal affairs of the Republic of Cyprus.

My Government regrets that the intercommunal talks remain stalled a year after they were so briefly resumed in Nicosia. We are seriously concerned at the continuing delay. We hope that the talks will be resumed promptly. We agree with the Secretary-General that, properly used, they still represent the best available method for negotiating a political settlement of the Cyprus problem. 97. I congratulate the Secretary-General on yet another clear and lucid report on UNFICYP operations and on the exercise of his good offices. It is abundantly clear that the failure to resume intercommunal talks does not reflect any lack of effort by him, by successive Special Representatives in Cyprus or by members of the Secretariat here in New York. On the contrary, I pay a tribute to their intensive efforts. We are also grateful to the officers and men of UNFICYP for their dedication to their task. 98. My Government supports the Secretary- General’s recommendation that UNFICYP’s mandate should be extended for a further six months. We will continue to contribute to UNFICYP during that period. We welcome the Secretariat’s intention to carry out a review of UNFICYP’s functions and procedures. We hope that all possibilities of worthwhile savings, compattble with the Force’s efficient functioning in its important task, will be energetically pursued, thus reducing the burden on troop contributors. 99. In this connexion, I should like to echo the concern expressed by the Secretary-General about the financial situation of UNFICYP. The deficit continues to mount. Repayment of the claims of troop contributors is seriously in arrears. My Government in any case claims only a fraction of the actual costs incurred in maintaining the British contingent. I therefore urge that the Secretary-General’s latest appeal for voluntary contributions [S/13692 of 14 December 19791 should meet with a generous response.

The United States has voted to extend the mandate of 101. The United States wishes at this time to pay a tribute once again to the officers and men of UNFICYP for the exemplary manner in which they have performed their duties. The international community owes them, and the countries which have so generously contributed their services, a debt of gratitude for their unselfish service to the cause of peace. 102. My Government also again expresses to the Secretary-General its gratitude for his untiring efforts to bring peace to Cyprus. As outlined in his report, the Secretary-General and his representatives have proceeded in a determined and cogent manner to narrow the difference between the parties to the Cyprus conflict. In particular, I wish to extend the commendation of my Government to Mr. Galindo Pohl, who, during his two years of persevering efforts, displayed imagination and dedication of high value to this effort. 103. We havefollowed with close interest the Secretary-General’s recent dispatch of Under- Secretary-General Perez de CuCllar on a visit to the area to conduct consultations with a view to resuming the intercommunal talks. We are disappointed that his mission was apparently unsuccessful. We urge the parties to the Cyprus dispute to co-operate fully with the Secretary-GeneraIand to agree to resume sustained and serious negotiations. We have been encouraged to hear in the Council today the statements of the parties acknowledging the necessity of a resumption of the intercommunal talks. 104. The United States is deeply disturbed to note the continuing deterioration of the financial situation of UNFICYP. Since 1964, the United States has contriiuted almost 50 per cent of the total amount pledged to support UNFICYP. We think it neither fair nor proper that a single Member State should furnish such a high proportion of the funds for a. peacekeeping force that serves the common interests of us all. We greatly regret that many countries in a position to do so, including permanent members of the Council, have still not responded to the repeated appeals by the Secretary-General for funds to offset UNFICYP’s growing-deficit, which places even-greater burdens on the troop-contrtbuting nations. We ask all nations to respond generously to the Secretary-General’s urgent request.

My delegation’s vote today in favour of the draft resolution just adopted by the Council, extending for six months the mandate of UNFICYP, was an indication of how much it still wishes to see the problem of Cyprus settled by negotiation. But it is a 106. Nevertheless, the fact that my country wishes to see a negotiated settlement of the question of Cyprus does not mean that we regard the extension of the mandate of the Force as a mere technical operation aimed at endorsing a situation. Even if the situation remains fairly calm, it is nevertheless a matter for concern and must not be allowed to continue. 107. The French authorities wish to express once again their support for the mission of-good offices that the Council has. entrusted to the Secretary-General. My delegation would like on this occasion to thank the Secretary-General for the constant and tenacious efforts he has made, with the valuable support of his associates. We would also assure him of the support of the French authorities.for a resumption of the intercommunal talks. 108. In expressing once again our confidence in the Secretary-General, we wish also to extend our best wishes to his new Special Representative in Cyprus, Mr. Gobbi, and our thanks to his predecessor, Mr. Galindo Pohl. We also express all our gratitude to the Under-Secretary-General for Special Political Affairs, Mr. Perez de CuCllar. We thank, too, General Quinn and ail the officers, men and civilian personnel. of the Force. Every one of them is contributing with exemplary devotion to the work done by the United Nations for peace.

The fact that the Council is today once again dealing with the question of extending the mandate of UNFICYP illustrates that the situation in the island. remains complicated. In paragraph 66 of his report to the Council, the Secretary-General states: “In the light of the situation on the ground and of political developments, I have concluded once again that the continued presence of UNFICYP remains necessary, both in helping to maintain calm in the island and in creating the-conditions in which the searchforapeaceful settlementcangoforward.” 110. The German Democratic Republic agreed that the mandate of UNFICYP should be extended for a 111. At their last meeting, the States parties to the Warsaw Treaty stressed with the utmost vigour in their Declaration that they have consistently favoured “the just and lasting peaceful settlement of conflict . situations, in whatever part of the world they might arise. There are no problems, global or regional, that they would consider impossible to solve by political methods. Such a solution requires strict respect for the sovereign rights and independence of ail States and total renunciation of interference in their internal affairs, of the use of force or the threat of force against them and of attempts to establish foreign domination over them and turn them into bases for aggression against other countries.” [S/13948, annex II, part III.] 112. The people of Cyprus, both the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots, are faced by serious dangers. As we know, certain circles of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are pursuing political and military goals inimical to the sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-alignment of Cyprus, despite the fact that in its resolution 34/30, the General Assembly once again demanded the immediate withdrawal of all foreign armed forces and foreign military presence from the Republic of Cyprus, as well as the cessation of any foreign intervention in the affairs of Cyprus. 113. Particular problems arise in connexion with the dangerous machinations of leading circles of United States imperialism and other reactionary forces; they go so far as to use military potential in order to expand their sphere of influence in the Middle East and in the areas of the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean. 114. A few days ago Cypriot newspapers reported that the United States intended to use its military bases, the Mediterranean bases of other NATO countries and the military bases of the United Kingdom in Cyprus for so-called punitive operations in the Middle East. The idea is obviously to station there detachments of the so-called rapid deployment forces, trained by Washington in order to achieve Washington’s ambitions in the Near and Middle East. The newspapers expressed the great concern of the people of Cyprus with regard to those plans. 115. The current visit of the President of the Republic of Cyprus, Mr. Spyros Kyprianou, to the German Democratic Republic, on the invitation of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Socialist “To make detente comprehensive and allembracing as a process, we need a peaceful resohrtion of international conflicts. The limitation and reduction of military presence and activity in the Mediterranean, Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans, in the Persian Gulf and the Caribbean, would serve the cause of peace in those areas. The withdrawal of warships carrying nuclear weapors from ‘the Mediterranean, and an undertaking not to place such weapons in non-nuclear-weapon States in the Mediterranean region, would be in keeping with the spirit of the Helsinki Final Act. “We are convinced that the problem of Cyprus, and indeed other global or regional international problems, could be solved simply by political means, There can be no doubt that the sovereign rights and independence of all States must be respected, that there must be no intervention in their internal affairs and that the use or threat of the use of force must be renounced.” Erich Honecker assured the people of Cyprus of the firm solidarity and active support of the German Democratic Republic in the future, as well. : 116. The German Democratic Republic supports a peaceful solution of the problem of Cyprus, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 34130. The German Democratic Republic views the talks between, the.two Cypriot communities, with the assistance of the Secretary-General, as an important step towards a settlement of the internal political aspects of the problem of Cyprus. We regret that the talks were suspended in June 1979 and have not yet been resumed, as was pointed out in the report of the Secretary- General to the Council. Good will and readiness to compromise are essential for the success of those talks. The exclusion of all foreign intervention in the internal atfairs of Cyprus is of equal importance. In that regard, the delegation of the German Democratic Republic would IIke to draw attention to the important proposal of the President of Cyprus, Mr. Kyprianou, with regard to the total disarming and demilitarization of Cyprus. The withdrawal of all foreign troops and the cessation of the foreign presence in the isIand would be decisive steps forward towards solving the problem of Cyprus and would at the same time promote the cause of dCtente and strengthen the security of peoples in the Mediterranean area. 117. The United Nations is in duty bound to assist in bringing about a settlement of the problem of Cyprus. It can play an effective role in ensuring the sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-alignment of Cyprus. In

I should like, at the outset, to express the appreciation of my delegation to the Secretary- GeneraI, for his constant efforts to bring about a resumption of the negotiations between the two Cypriot communities. He has been assisted in those efforts by the effective collaboration of three distinguished Latin Americans: Messrs. Perez de Cuellar, Galindo Pohl and Gobbi. There is no doubt that intercommunal negotiations, under the aegis of the Secretary-General, represent the best means of restoring peace in Cyprus. 119. Mexico has joined the other, members of the Council in extending the mandate of UNFICYP for six more months. The work of that Force over the years has been exemplary. Moreover, it has been almost a year. since, the intercommunal talks were interrupted, and that has,created a situation which, if allowed to continue, will alter the original purpose for which UNFICYP was created. 120. The stationing of the Force must not serve to perpetuate a division of Cyprus. Sixteen years ago, its presence was intended to encourage the parties to reach a solution to the problem. Indeed, the original justification for the Force was that it would prevent clashes between the two communities and, at the-same time, facilitate contacts between them with a view to a return to normal conditions. 121. -‘However, given the present circumstances, in whichthe two communities have effected a separation between them, the Turkish Cypriots being concentrated in the north and the Greek Cypriots in the remainder of the island, and in spite of the fact that for more than a decade and a half, the Council has renewed the mandate of the Force twice yearly, in almost ritual fashion, the present functions of the Force are not those which it was originally created to carry out: its primary task at present is that of overseeing the cease-fire. In those circ.umstances, my delegation wonders whether the perennia!$roblemof the’Force’s deficit might not be solved by adapting the Force to its practical functions. 122. The problem is basically political. We note with regret that events do not live up to the expectations of the intemationa1 community. The intercommunal negotiations have periods of stagnation and have never been characterized ,by dynamism. The lo-point agreement of May 1979 between Mr. Kyprianou and Mr. Denktag provides an excellent basis for those negotiations. However, clear political will.on the part of those directly concerned to resolve the problem is absent. 124. My delegation wishes to express its hope that negotiations between the two communities, on a basis of equality, will resume without delay and that they will be directed to substantive questions, in accordance with repeated resolutions of the Security Council and of the General Assembly. It would of course also be desirable if other resolutions on the problem were implemented, particularly those concerning the fate of displaced persons and the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the island. 125. A number of fundamental principles are involved in the question of Cyprus. Of course, our duty is to preserve peace and security in the region. However, the heart of the matter is that it is the very survival of a State and respect for the self-determination of all its citizens that we must guarantee.

My ,delegation supported the resolution just adopted, which extends the mandate of UNFICYP. We did so because we share the view expressed by the Secretary-General in his report that the continued presence of the Force remains necessary, both in helping to maintain calm in the island, and, in crealing the conditions in which the search for a peaceful settlement can go forward. 132. But there was another, perhaps positive, side to that false presentation of facts: it led me to appreciate even more the extremely delicate and difficult task of the Secretary-General and his team, to admire them even more for their perseverance and to thank them once again for trying to help Cyprus. 127. My delegation has followed with interest the efforts of the Secretary-General to bring about a resumption of the intercommunal talks. We regret the fact that, in spite of the narrowing of the gap between the positions of the parties, so far it has not been possible to agree on the modalities which would take into account the common ground existing between them and facilitate concrete negotiations to resolve the tragic situation in Cyprus. 128. We wish to reiterate our position that direct intercommunal talks under the auspices of the Secretary-General and based on the lo-point agreement of 19 May 1979 constitute the best possible approach to a just settlement which would bring about reconciliation and harmony and would guarantee the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and nonalignment of Cyprus. ! 15

I call on the representative of Cyprus, who has asked to be allowed to make a statement.

It is not my intention to reply to the individual who appears before the Council by virtue of the provisions of rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure, or to reply to the distorted presentation of facts well known to each and every one of the members of the Council, including what transpired last weekend in Cyprus during the mission of Mr. Perez de CuCllar and the necessity for the reservations which were referred to by us, as well as by the other side. Suffice it to state that the reservations became imperative, or essential, when the other side refused to negotiate on the basis of the IO-point agreement. r 133. Similarly, I should like once again to thank the members of the Council for adopting the resolution, and to thank those representatives who, through their statements, reiterated the interest of their Govemments in a solution of the Cyprus problem. The meeting rose at 1.25 p.m. NOTES ’ A/35/161. z Oflcial Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-fourth Ses- ,slon. Plenary Meetings, 72rd meeting. para. 78. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. ’ COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNTES Les publications des Nations Unies sent en vente dans les librairics et les agences depositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous aup& de votre libraire ou adressez-vous B : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Geneve. KAK IIOjIYgEiTh EI3AAHHII OPI-AHZi BAItHI OG-hELWHEHHhlX HAlMa H3fiaiwa Opraxwsauua 06ZennHeHnbrx HauaR MOX(HO xynw-rb a xrrnaor~rx rdarasar-rax w arenrcreax BO acex pationax anwpa. HaeonnTe cnpaaxn 06 nsnanuax a eauresl KHWXCHOM Marasune HJIU rmrua~e no anpecy: Oprannsauna 06’aenunexrtbrx HaunR. Ce~uxn no npo&tawte nsnauuR, HLM-Mopa HIIH XCeueaa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estin en venta en libretias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes del mundo. Cons&e a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. L&o in United Nations, New York 00400 83-61462-September 19862,050 .\.