Note to Messrs. Gambari and Tharoor Letter from Kai Falkman The Secretary-General would be grateful for a response to the attached letter from Ambassador Kai Falkman. DPA should coordinate the preparation of the draft. Thank you. Lopes 15 March 2006 cc: Mr. Mortimer \\' MAR 1 5 2006 ':. i 26-03141 RlNDOGATAN 42 Stockholm 25 February 2006 SE-115 58 STOCKHOLM -_. C L TEL/FAX+46 8 661 7647 E-MAIL: [email protected] His Excellency Mr Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations, NEW YORK 1. Inspired by today's news that Denmark has invited Islamic and Christian leaders to a conference _pn religious dialogue, which immediately was criticized by excluded Jewish groups, I wrote the enclosed paper expressing my conviction that such a conference could only be fully respected and jsusee§§M under the aegis of the United Nations. It is, in my view, highly appropriate time for a UN initiative, which certainly would be welcomed by the international community. The paper has been sent to Shashi Tharoor by e-mail. 2. Peter Wallensteen and I are grateful.for, the positive reaction by Michael Moller to our report from Cyprus last November. The Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs has asked us to continue our academic consultations with the parties to the conflict in the spirit of the Sigtuna process to encourage confidence-building measures of common interest to the two communities on the island. An essay with a light poetical touch on Voices across the wall of Cyprus is hereby enclosed for your information. It may be that the poetical absurd best describes the long conflict of Cyprus. Kai Falkman , 86 OFFICE RlNDOGATAN 41 Stockholm 25 February 2006 SE-115 58 STOCKHOLM TEL/FAX+46 8 661 7647 E-MAIL: [email protected] Proposal for a conference on religious dialogue under the aegis of the United Nations 1. Denmark's government has invited Islamic and Christian religious leaders and experts to a conference on religious dialogue. Jewish groups have criticized the Danish government for not issuing invitations to them. 2. An international conference on religious dialogue can be fully respected and successful only under the aegis of the United Nations. 3. Therefore the Secretary-General of the United Nations should take the initiative to assemble leaders of the world's religions to a conference on religious dialogue. 4. The conference could be convened in the spirit of Dag Hammarskjold's statement in the General Assembly on 10 April 1953 after his election as Secretary-General: "We are of different creeds and convictions./.../ But common to us all, and above all other convictions stands the truth, once expressed by a Swedish poet when he said that the greatest prayer of man does not ask for victory but for peace." 5. The United Nations stands outside all confessions but is, nevertheless, an instrument of faith, expressed by the Charter of the United Nations. As such it is inspired by what unites and not by what divides the great religions of the world. In this spirit the United Nations is required by the peoples of the world, more and more split by conflicts, violence and wars in the name of religion, to initiate a responsible action for peace. Kai Falkman Voices across the wall of Cyprus In the hotel room I pull back the curtains. Minarets at dusk The laments of Mohammed Cross the wall The hotel in Nicosia is right next to the wall that divides Cyprus. Beyond the minaret stands the bulk of the mountains in the north with the huge picture of the Turkish and Turk Cypriot flag laid out with white painted stones. In the evening I take a walk on Lidas Street, the pedestrian street on the Greek Cypriot side, crowded with people strolling, illuminated outdoor cafes, dazzling shop windows. Suddenly the street ends in af' wail, a wooden staircase up to a viewpoint, a tree in a buffer zone where vegetation runs wild, a new wall and beyond that, darkness. The same wall, the same tree I saw ten years ago, when I visited Cyprus for the first time as the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs' special adviser on the Cyprus issue. Nothing has changed over these ten years, despite intensive UN negotiations, resulting in the Kofi Annan Plan. A plan that was rejected by 76 per cent of Greek Cypriots in the referendum on 24 April 2004. Before that it was the Turk Cypriots who rejected the UN proposals, now it's the Greek Cypriots, while 65 per cent of Turk Cypriots voted yes. The same drama, only the roles are reversed. Now I am back accompanied by Professor Peter Wallensteen, peace and conflict researcher at Uppsala University. We are here on the initiative of Ambassador Ingemar Lindahl to talk about Dag Hammarskjold's Visions and Legacy at universities in the Turk Cypriot and Greek Cypriot parts and in the neutral UN zone, at Ledra Palace, once a luxury hotel, now £ run-down camp for British UN soldiers. Between lectures we set out on a round of talks, north and south, with past friends and acquaintances and with new political representatives of the two communities in order to form a picture of the current situation on the island. Ten years ago we took the initiative to what came to be known as the "Sigtuna Process", bringing together political representatives of Greek and Turk Cypriots, Greece and Turkey and the UN Special Representative for Cyprus for informal talks, first in Sigtuna, then in Chios in Greece and in Istanbul. The intention was to try to find points of common interest for the parties, which could then promote a solution of the Cyprus conflict, which has gone on since 1964. The voices we now listen to hardly herald a will to find a solution. President Papadopoulos' support for a no to the Annan Plan in the referendum seems to have increased rather than decreased, and therefore does not generate any political will for change ahead of the parliamentary elections in May 2006. Why did the Greek Cypriots vote no to this comprehensive plan for a solution? Because the President, the Church and the four TV channels urged them to do so, with the motivation that the Annan Plan contained more concessions to the Turkish side than the previous version of the plan during President derides9 time. Politicians must show that they are winners, not losers, we were told. No matter how they voted, the Republic of Cyprus would be a member of the EU a week after the referendum. Therefore, President Papadopoulos wasn't taking any risks, when - to the surprise and disappointment of the UN - he advocated a no. As a full member of the EU, Cyprus wtiuld be a powerful member of a political union of 25 states, to which Turkey was also a candidate. This would give the Republic of Cyprus an unbeatable advantage on Turkey, which constitutes a triumph as Cyprus had been invaded in 1974 by Turkish forces, which had not since been withdrawn from the island. How would the EU be able to accept Turkey as a member if it occupied a third of an EU country with 40 000 troops? In his new position of strength Papadopoulos did not feel that he had to negotiate with the Turk Cypriot minority on setting up a federation with shared power. He sees the solution in osmosis, a concept he put forward in the UN General Assembly at the summit in September 2005. This word had many journalists and diplomats looking in their computers and dictionaries to understand its meaning. I recognised it from a haiku poem by Dag Hammarskjold: Trees, waters, crescent moon - all this night in shivering osmosis. Here, osmosis means the mutual dissolution on this night of everything in nature. Osmosis comes form Greek and means "thrusting, pressing", according \o the Swedish National Encyclopaedia, while the Swedish Academy's Glossary explains the word as "a fluid's penetration of a membrane". If the UN is the membrane, a thin film between the Greek Cypriot and the Turk Cypriot parts, the fluid is the Republic of Cyprus, mixed witlj the EU, which penetrates the membrane through its weight, dissolving the Turk Cypriots. A Turk Cypriot gave this interpretation, while a Greek Cypriot was of the opinion that it meant closer ties between two parties, resulting in a total union. Scientists talk about an osmotic shock, when there is a sudden increase in osmotic potential. This has happened through EU membership. "We have become spectators" one Turk Cypriot complained. As citizens of a state no one except Turkey recognises they have no cards to negotiate with. Their only negotiating card is the Turkish troops, but the Republic of Cyprus does not want to negotiate about the troop presence with the Turk Cypriots, preferring to do so with the Republic of Turkey instead. Papadopoulos feels that he can calmly wait for the day when Turkey is forced to fully recognise the Republic of Cyprus. This day has to come sooner or later, preferably later, Turkey hopes, because Turkey cannot become a member of the EU without recognising all its Member States, including Cyprus. Does a Turkish recognition of the Republic of Cyprus entail a de- recognition of the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus"? Naturally, according to the Greek Cypriots, white leading Turk Cypriote share another view with us: A Turkish government that gives up Turkish Cyprus will not have tfiie support of the people and the military. In that case the government would collapse. Prime-Minister Erdogan doesn't dare take a risk like that before the parliamentary elections in 2007.