Misguided reasons for not recognising the TRNC

It was while reading Robert Ellis’ article, “Cyprus: misguided support for direct trade with TRNC” [1], that I decided to write this article explaining why I think his reasoning is faulty. His logic is of the form sometimes used by children who say, “thank goodness I don’t like broccoli otherwise I’d end up eating something I didn’t like.”

To summarise his reasons for believing the S&D group are wrong to push for Direct Trade in the European Parliament:

  • thank goodness the 2004 Greek Cypriot veto of TRNC Direct Trade succeeded because if it had became legal it would have been illegal “because the Council’s Legal Service opined that the legal basis for the Commision’s (sic) proposal was invalid.”
  • thank goodness the 2010 Direct Trade attempt looks like failing because if it succeeded it would have allowed the TRNC to become a “competent authority” and that would be wrong because “the European Court of Justice in its Anastasiou judgment from 1974 precludes acceptance of movement and phytosanitary certificates issued by authorities other than the competent authorities of the Republic of Cyprus” and the TRNC is not seen as one now.
  • thank goodness that Direct Trade isn’t going to be allowed and planes and ships end up travelling directly from north Cyprus and then Turkey opening up its ports to south Cyprus because this “would constitute a violation of the sovereign rights of the ROC and  consequently be found invalid by the European Court.”
  • thank goodness the TRNC aren’t going to be recognised because if it were this would aid “Turkey’s aim is to create a Taiwan situation in northern Cyprus.” (I suppose Robert Ellis supports surrendering Taiwan to the Chinese)

To summarise the article, it says that south Cyprus IS Cyprus and the TRNC does not exist and anything that goes against this must be wrong. Well I’ve got news for you Robert, the TRNC not only exists it is thriving!

[1] www.neurope.eu

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.