In spite of the tense and negative climate created by the declaration of the Denktash pseudostate,
the Cyprus government continued its efforts for reconciliation. Thus the then
President, Mr. Kyprianou submitted on January 11, 1984 to the U.N. Secretary-General
"a framework for a comprehensive settlement to the Cyprus problem".
This proposal, which was hailed by international public opinion as a serious and bold step
for peace, was in full conformity with U.N. resolutions on Cyprus and the 1977 and 1979
high-level agreements and provided, in the circumstances, the way for a speedy solution,
ensuring an independent, united, peaceful and non-aligned Republic of Cyprus, free of
occupation troops and external interference.
The principles laid down in the proposed framework fulfilled the essential prerequisites for
internal and external security and provided for a workable federal system whilst ensuring
the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all the citizens of the Republi of Cyprus.
The Turkish side, consistent to its pursued policy on Cyprus, rejected outright the
Kyprianou proposal refusing even to discuss it.
The U.N. Secretary-General proposed at this stage an alternative procedure to break the
deadlock. On March 10, 1984 Perez de Cuellar undertook new efforts aiming at resuming
the intercommunal dialogue. He proposed, inter alia, a series of goodwill measures
including the transfer of the Greek sector of Famagusta (Varosha) to interim - United
Nations administration and the subsequent resettlement of this area by its Greek Cypriot
inhabitants. The U.N. Secretary-General also called on the Turkish side to give no followup
to the so-called declaration of "an independent Turkish Cypriot state".
These proposals were transmitted to the two sides, which were expected to reply within a
short time. However, the Turkish Cypriot leader used various delaying tactics to gain time
and instead of a reply he announced on April 10 that his pseudo-state' s assembly had
decided to hold "a referendum" in August on a new "constitution" and to proceed with
"general elections" in November. These new provocative acts, which constituted new
illegal attempts atconsolidating the faits accomplis violated once again the latest U.N.
Security Council Resolution (541) on Cyprus.
In order to save his initiative Mr. de Cuellar sent to Cyprus his Special Representative Mr.
Gobbi for consultations with the interested parties and to receive the reply of the Turkish
side.
The official reply of the Turkish side had not yet been given when on April 17 it was
announced that Turkey had officially accredited an "ambassador" of the so-called "state" in
Ankara.
On April 18 Denktash gave at last his arrogant reply to the UN Special Representative
which constituted a real insult to the prestige of the U.N. First, he declared that the U.N.
Secretary-General had no right to submit any proposals and to demand a reply to them.
Then he went on to say that he would halt the policy of consolidating his "state" only if the
Government of Cyprus ceased to represent Cyprus as a sovereign state. He coldbloodedly
demanded the dismantling of the Republic of Cyprus as a precondition to negotiations.
Only after that was done, according to Mr. Denktash, could there take place a high-level
meeting between Mr. Kyprianou as the Greek Cypriot leader and himself as the leader of
the so-called Turkish Cypriot state.
In order to create the illusion that his reply contained positive elements he repeated his
unacceptable August 1981 proposals concerning the return of a certain number of refugees
to Famagusta, which would have effectively transformed the city into a buffer zone.
The continuing Turkish secessionist moves and their arrogant attitude towards the U.N.
and the Secretary-General led to the failure of the initiative.
