Sometimes I am bemused as how people comprehend certain statements:
What Mr. Palmer said is very clear:
1. “……the decision over whether a new settlement model would be discussed remained with the two leaders.”
This means very clearly that if there is no “just and lasting” agreement between the leaders of the two communities (which after so many years seems to be the case) on the BBF model, then there are other alternative settlement models that can be negotiated (which now seems to be an intelligent case).
2. US “recognises the right of the Republic of Cyprus to exploit its natural resources,” but within the framework of settlement. US supports the equitable sharing of the revenue from the exploitation of natural gas between the two communities.
This means exploitation is subject to a framework of settlement between the two communities. No settlement, no exploitation. The motto is “equitable sharing of revenue”. In other words, if there is an ECONOMIC exploitation resulting in revenues, such revenues are to be distributed equitably.
3. “The Republic of Cyprus was a strategic partner for the US……..Turkish Cypriots and Turkey are also friends and partners in the region….”.
This means US is friends with “ROC”, TC’s and Turkey. As far as the US is concerned, there has be a negotiated “just and lasting” settlement between friends and partners.
Sometinmes I wonder whether the specific words “was” and “is” have other deep meanings!!!
My friends, the US position is very clear. Their strategic enemy has always been Russia. So my advice to my dear neighbors is to start rethinking and reforming their beliefs quickly and understand why this island has reached to its current political status as a result of certain fanatical behavior throughout its contemporary history; perhaps going back to mid-1950’s.
TM (name supplied)