At its meeting on 29 June 1999 the United Nations Security Council passed two resolutions on Cyprus.

One of the resolutions is on the extension of the mandate of the United Nations Peace Keeping Force in Cyprus ( UNFICYP) for a period ending on 15 December 1999. The other resolution is on the good offices mission of the UN Secretary-General.

The resolution on UNFICYP, underlines that the mandate of UNFICYP has been extended by the agreement of the so-called "Government of Cyprus". However, in reality a government representative of the whole island does not exist. This approach being incongruent with the facts of the island, constitutes the main cause for the absence of a settlement. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus ( TRNC) has informed the President of the Security Council that the resolution which recognizes the Greek Cypriot side as the government of Cyprus is unacceptable and that co-operation with UNFICYP would continue only within the framework of decisions taken by the government of the TRNC. Turkey supports the position of the TRNC.

Furthermore, the Security Council resolution on UNFICYP contains certain views laid out as a basis on which a settlement should rest upon. These views, although presented as the basis of a settlement, do not reflect the approval of the two parties in Cyprus. Therefore they do not have any validity.

On the other hand, the resolution on the good offices mission has been drafted in line with the G-8 Summit Declaration.

The good offices mission of the Secretary-General on Cyprus entails assisting the two parties on the island to reach a freely negotiated and mutually acceptable settlement. In the meantime, owing to Greek Cypriot acts and allegations, serious obstacles remain in the way of a negotiating process in Cyprus. In the light of these circumstances, the adoption of a Security Council resolution based on the G-8 declaration is inconsistent with the mission of good offices.

It should be noted that, while Security Council resolutions call upon both parties to negotiate without preconditions, the Greek Cypriot side is portrayed as if it could represent the whole of Cyprus, through references to the so-called "government of Cyprus" . Likewise, while the starting of unconditional negotiations is being stressed as a necessity, these resolutions also try to define a settlement which does not rest on the joint consent of the two parties.

Any progress in Cyprus can be achieved only if a correct diagnosis is made as to why no result has been obtained despite numerous talks that have taken place in the past and if the realities of the island are acknowledged. We hold the view that progress towards a settlement can be possible by acknowledging the existence of two equal and sovereign states in Cyprus and by showing respect to the Turkish-Greek balance over the island.