AKEL announcement on the JV and DISY declarations on the Cyprus government spokesman and disi consider that yesterday's statement by the Turkish Foreign Ministry as well as the interview of UN Assistant Secretary-General Geoffrey Feltman vindicate the narrative and politics As far as what happened in Crans Montana is concerned, it doesn't matter what Turkey says after a holiday.

The UN SG in its Report of 17 September 2017 notes that the three guarantor powers – i.e. Turkey – had shown a constructive willingness to find mutually acceptable security solutions. If the government had the view that the UN SG distorted reality, why has it never before complained about the content of the Report? Why did he not react strongly to turkey's deinence and the sharing of responsibilities exclusively to the two communities for the shipwreck? Mr. Feltman, who is cited by the government, not only does he not vindicate the anastasiades narrative, but reiterates in his interview what is recorded in the Guterres Report on the issue of security. Britain had supported our position to end guarantees and any invasive rights, especially since the first day of the solution. So why so far the government rejects the informal document on the mechanism for implementing the solution which clearly abolished the guarantee and invasive rights after leaving the current guarantor powers only an advisory role? A spokesperson is asking us to drop the controversy and continue the effort to resolve from where we have stayed in Crans Montana. If the government means it then it must itself stop demonising political equality and return to convergence for effective participation, which includes one vote in the Cabinet. When this is done, then Turkey will not be able to invoke the issue of equality policy as an alibi for the continuation of guarantees, as it does in yesterday's statement. It will be possible for Turkey to be judged in practice, i.e. whether it consents to a solution of principles in the Cyprus issue or whether it will be exposed internationally, which is not the case today. at least from akel's point of view, and the "controversies", as he calls our criticism of Mr Anastasiades' policy.