UN, ECHR, and profit-loss calculations are important in the subject of Varosha

Cyprus International University (CIU) Department of Political Science and International Relations academic staff Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şevki Kıralp, made evaluations in relation to the Greek Cypriot suggestion of “Ercan for Varosha”, and the issue of Varosha at an international level.

Underlining that in relation to the issue of Varosha, the decisions of the United Nations (UN) Security Council and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) are the main international dimensions that can be taken into account, Kıralp added that in accordance with the Security Council resolutions numbered 550 and 789, the UN demanded that except for the legal residents, no settlement is to be made in Varosha, that the return of the legal residents be enabled, and that Varosha be left under UN control.

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kıralp reminded that the Security Council and UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres repeated these requests last year again.

On the other hand, pointing out that with relation to the case of Xenides-Arestis that went before the ECHR in relation to immovable property in Varosha owned by a Greek Cypriot, the court issued a decision in favor of the claimant, Kıralp expressed that it is a requirement of the ECHR's jurisprudence to recognize the property rights of the Greek Cypriot residents of Varosha.

Providing information in relation to the point of view of the Turkish side in relation to Varosha, Kıralp went on to say, "During the historical process, the Turkish side has focused upon two different approaches in relation to their policy of Varosha: The first was the handing over of Varosha to the UN upon the condition that a step was to be taken in alleviating the isolation in return. Another approach was to open Varosha under the control of the Turkish side without its transfer to the UN, in an effort to direct the Greek Cypriot owners to the Immovable Property Commission (IPC), bringing the region to the TRNC economy".

Kıralp noted that the opening of direct flights to Ercan in exchange for the transfer of Varosha to the UN, is in line with the Security Council's decisions and the actions of the ECHR, and defined that in this situation the Turkish side would gain from the alleviation of the isolations through Ercan.

In her statement, Kıralp added that “Varosha versus Ercan" and similar views, despite the fact they had been discussed during the negotiation processes previously, could not be realized, and noted that "Especially after the Annan Plan, the Turkish side were disappointed with the international community”.

Stating that the opening of Varosha while still under TRNC control may not contradict the ECHR case-law due to the Greek Cypriots' opportunity to apply to the IPC, Kıralp elaborated, "However, this policy has already been met with a negative reaction from the UN Security Council".

Explaining that the adding of Varosha to the TRNC economy could be deemed as a violation of the "not make settlements other than legal residents" call of the Security Council, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kıralp concluded, "The reactions of the international community may grow. Therefore, the best way to make a decision in relation to Varosha, is for the Turkish side to focus upon the decisions of the UN and ECHR, and the profit-loss calculations”.