By James K.J. Lee, Representative Taipei Representative Office in The Hague. Climate change is a pressing global issue. It affects all countries and much debate and effort have gone into attempting to overcome the challenges it presents to the world. It does not recognize borders and makes no distinction in political color, size or status of countries. Despite not being a member of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Taiwan has nevertheless pro-actively and voluntarily participated in global efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emission and remains keen to join international efforts aimed at energy saving and carbon emission reduction. President Ma Ying-jeou has explicitly declared “developing an environment characterized by low carbon emission and high reliance on green energy” one of the five pillars of Taiwan’s national development. Becoming a spearhead of his policy, the government initiated a plan to build a “low carbon and sustainable homeland” which encourages the people of Taiwan to actively contribute to its realization. Additionally, Taiwan has come up with its own strategy to cope with the challenges brought forth by climate change with the aim of containing and adapting to it. This strategy has led to a master plan in 2009 for the reduction of carbon emission and the creation of a sound legal environment and green transportation infrastructure, as well as low-carbon energy systems, communities and industries. In 2012 Taiwan also adopted national climate change adaptation guidelines covering eight major domains, including essential infrastructure, energy supply and health. The effort put into combatting the impact of climate change by Taiwan since 2009 has sorted effect. In June last year Taiwan inaugurated the world’s largest carbon capture plant in Hualien, the first of its kind in Asia, which represents a significant step forward for Taiwan in carbon capture and reduction. Taiwan also made significant progress in upgrading its solar and wind power capacity and is among the world’s top 5 for installing solar water heaters. In 2012, Taiwan’s economy recorded a growth of 1.32 % but carbon emission fell by 1.90%. Taiwan’s success story could serve as an example for many countries how we could achieve an inverse relationship between economic growth and carbon emission. Taiwan’s unique position in the international political arena should not be a prohibitive obstacle to the inclusion of Taiwan in the UNFCCC. There are precedents which were created for Taiwan’s meaningful participation in other international organizations and institutions. The latest such precedents include the official participation of Taiwan in the World Health Assembly since 2009  as well as the invitation in September 2013 from the President of the Council to attend the 38^th Session of the Assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organization. It is clear that the desire and capability is present for Taiwan to become a valuable partner in the struggle against climate change. Taiwan’s efforts have been recognized and appraised by many UNFCCC-members and its inclusion in the UNFCCC would be beneficial and instrumental to its cause.  

On the occasion of the 54^th anniversary since the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus. By Dr. Kyriacos Kouros, Ambassador of the Republic of Cyprus to the Kingdom of the Netherlands This year on the 1^st of October we celebrate the 54^th anniversary since the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus; a member state of the European Union since 2004. Unfortunately our celebrations are still marred by the consequences of military invasion and occupation of Cyprus since 1974 which constitute, to this day, a sore point in the contemporary history of the island: the military occupation, the forcible division, the violation of the fundamental human rights of thousands of Cypriots, the massive colonization of the occupied areas, the ethnic cleansing and targeted cultural destruction, the property usurpation of displaced persons and ethnic segregation imposed remain the main characteristics of the status quo on the island. A historical background By looking at the map, one can clearly observe that Cyprus lies on historical crossroads, in an area of the world where civilizations from east and west collide and major historic events have taken place over the centuries; a European country with a Middle Eastern flavour. Irrespective of the situation in Cyprus, we remain the only example of stability in a conflict-prone and restful South-eastern Mediterranean neighbourhood. Cyprus became an independent state in August 16, 1960. The struggle for the right of self-determination of the island with a predominant Greek population (80%) was met in the 1950s with fierce resistance by the then colonial rulers. In total disregard of the Lausanne Treaty (24 July 1923), a third country was invited in the talks for the future of Cyprus in an attempt to discourage the Greek majority living in the island from keep on asking for union (enosis) with Greece. The new word of division (taxim) was introduced! Diplomatic efforts in the 1950s to solve the problem failed; a guerrilla war and civil disobedience tactics were launched by the Greeks of Cyprus between the years 1955-1959. Finally the sovereign and independent state of the Republic of Cyprus was established as the only option left on the negotiating table. What is important to point out is that during the 1950s this decision for the future of Cyprus was taken in the absence of the Cypriots themselves because the situation was considered a “problem among NATO allies”; the island’s leaderships of the two biggest ethnic groups – Greeks and Turks alike, were just invited at a later stage to co-sign an agreement drafted by the departing colonial rulers and agreed upon by the two “motherlands”, providing for an extremely rigid, detailed and austere Constitution which introduced segregated institutions, the concept of third countries as guarantors with debatable intervening powers that contradicted the UN Charter, the stationing of armies from the “motherlands” for the supposedly security of the indigenous population; and more importantly established two foreign military bases on the island under a unique regime! The Constitution of Cyprus does not allow for amendments in the most basic characteristics of the new state! Therefore Cypriot legislators do not have the necessary tools to deal with evolving social needs and challenges through the expected process of a state of law! Moreover, the existing Constitution of Cyprus was not put to a referendum; nowhere its text refers to people as the source of its legitimacy! Instead it speaks of two communities which elect separately their leaders in the executive and the legislative: the Cypriots formed an exceptional ethnic partnership at the altar of foreign vested interests. The 80 percent of the Greeks felt they were tricked to sharing the power with the 18 percent of the Turks; and the Turks found them selves in an unexpected privileged position of power-sharing which naturally they did not want to give back.  Other tinier ethnic groups like the Maronites, Armenians and Latins were branded religious groups and were forced to choose to join into one of the two communities. Few hundred Roma are mentioned nowhere. Tensions between the Greek- and Turkish-Cypriots climaxed almost three and a half years after the establishment of the new state when then Cyprus President Archbishop Makarios proposed Constitutional amendments in an attempt to make it more proportionate to the understanding of the Greeks. Extremists on both sides took the lead and violence broke out. The authorities of the young state were found ineffectual to deal with the paramilitary forces of both sides which were supported by third parties outside the island. Despite the initial deployment of UN peacekeepers in 1964, sporadic inter-communal violence continued and the Turkish Cypriots decided and removed themselves from all institutional bodies, leading their community into ghettos, or “enclaves”, spread throughout the island; and they remained there for ten years waiting for an opportunity! Their withdrawal to the “enclaves” can mostly be attributed to the wish of the Turkish Cypriot elite to enforce a de-facto partition of Cyprus. On their part, the Greek Cypriot political elite filled up the void of power while inter-communal talks were launched in 1968 in a bid to find a way out so that both Greek- and Turkish-Cypriots coexist in what the Greek majority considered a fairer administrational system. The concept of the Right of Necessity provided the necessary legal instruments to the Greek-Cypriots to rule the island in the absence of the Turkish Cypriots. In 1974, a coup against the legitimate Cyprus government orchestrated by the Athens junta and supported by Greek Cypriot extremists and advocates of union with one of the “motherlands” on the island – in essence a sort of a mono-communal civil war between the Greeks, provided the excuse for a military intervention by the other “motherland” on the pretext that this action was necessary to restore the constitutional order in the island. But this was only a pretext: even when the constitutional order was restored the invading power continued to violate the cease-fire, and after driving a conference summoned in Geneva about the situation in Cyprus to a deadlock, it launched a second attack. Unfortunately, occupation troops remain since, controlling around 36.2 per cent of the northern-bound territory of the Republic of Cyprus. During the events of the summer of 1974, branded unsuccessfully as “peace operation” by the invading power, one third of the Greek Cypriots and one half of the Turkish Cypriots found them selves displaced away from their homes, a hundredth of the population mostly civilians lost their lives; about 2000 families found themselves searching for the whereabouts of their missing that include several hundred civilians as well as Prisoners of War; properties were destroyed, cultural treasures looted and so on. The “peace operation” was a full-blown military invasion with all its gruesome repercussions of atrocities. Two parallel 180 km-long cease-fire lines still divide the island from west to east while a UN peace keeping force patrols the buffer zone in between. Realistically speaking, no termination of hostilities has been achieved; and the cease-fire lines got a perverted “politically-correct” name of a «Green Line» or «buffer zone» or «no man’s land». As for the uneducated masses or the millions of clueless tourists who visit this exceptionally beautiful holiday haven from all over the world, the cease-fire lines look like a border of sorts. Repeated rounds of negotiations since the cease-fire achieved in the summer of 1974 did not produce any significant results due to the intransigence displayed by the occupying forces. In 1983, the subordinate administration of the occupying country in the occupied areas of Cyprus unanimously declared itself the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (“TRNC”), but it is recognized only by the occupying power. Repeated UN Security Council resolutions have declared the secessionist entity illegal, call for the withdrawal of the declaration and ask from the international community not to recognise it or facilitate its elements in any way. Since then the repeated rounds of on-going talks are further complicated by more complex elements, such as the island’s demographic change with transfer of illegal settlers from the occupying “motherland”. Today the settlers are estimated to be two to three times more than of the remaining Turkish-Cypriots in the territory under occupation. Moreover and unfortunately, a widespread ethnic cleansing policy has been systematically implemented in the areas under occupation to the extent that almost no name of town, village or street resembles anymore those before the summer of 1974 while traces of Greek or Christian cultural characteristics are systematically being wiped out. Having been severely looted, Christian Greek and Armenian, Orthodox or Catholic churches, monasteries, cemeteries and other monuments of historic significance are being turned to anything but places of worship and preservation. It is estimated than about 60.000 cultural, archaeological and religious treasures have been scattered worldwide through black market routes. What sort of a Cyprus settlement we seek? In a nutshell Since 1974, the international community is trying to deal with the situation in Cyprus by making use of the good offices of the UN Secretary General. This means that the UN Secretary General has been mandated to assist the two sides to reach a settlement but does not have any other powers such that of an arbitrator or of a judge. A number of attempts to solve the situation in Cyprus from 1977 till today have reached a deadlock! The two sides have agreed since 1977 in general terms that a solution of the situation in Cyprus could be best served with the transformation of the current unitary state to a federal state (UNSG Resolutions 750, 10 April 1992), comprising two politically equal communities. This equality was also defined. It does not mean equal numerical participation in any future federal settlement but the effective participation of both communities in all organs and decisions of the said federal entity. (Paragraph 11, Report by the UN SG on his mission of good offices in Cyprus, 3 April 1992, document S/23780). Most recent developments and the way ahead A new round of fully-fledged negotiations under the good offices of the UN Secretary General was launched on 11^th February 2014, after five months of extensive preparations. This will be our most recent on-going attempt to solve the Cyprus issue; hopefully the last one.  A new catalyst can be the findings of natural gas and oil in the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Republic of Cyprus. The export of significant quantities of natural gas which exists in the South Eastern Mediterranean basin could potentially also find a way through Turkey; but first we have to solve the Cyprus issue. More than any other, we the Cypriots are fully aware that time is of the essence. More than one third of the Cypriot population continues to be internally displaced, irrespective that we had to go on living and building our lives again from scratch. The displaced people “are being denied access to and control, use and enjoyment of their property as well as any compensation for the interference with their property rights”, as has been reaffirmed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in numerous decisions, the most recent being the historic judgment of the said Court with regard to the claim by the Republic of Cyprus against Turkey for just satisfaction, on May 12 2014. The 43,000 soldiers of the occupation army that are stationed in Cyprus are a constant security threat. The large number of settlers illegally being imported since 1974 is altering the demographic character of the areas under occupation and threatens the viability of any prospective settlement. The ethno-cultural cleansing which carries on is self evident to any visitor to the occupied part of Cyprus. New generations of Cypriots are coming of age having known only the ethnic segregation imposed by the consequences of the 1974 invasion. Concluding, I would like to reiterate that the status quo in Cyprus is UNACCEPTABLE. Our vision remains a re-united Cyprus, free from occupation troops, fully respecting the fundamental freedoms and human rights of all its citizens and fulfilling the aspirations of all Cypriots to live and thrive within our European family.  

                            By H.E. Asein Isaev, Ambassador of Kyrgyzstan to the Netherlands. A small country in the middle of Central  Asia has a long and amazing  history and culture. After 70 years of representing part of huge Soviet system  Kyrgyzstan has got over different   periods of state transformation.  The revolutions and rejection of 2 authoritarian regimes left deep traces  in the history of   kyrgyz society. In 2005 and 2010 dishonored 2 Presidents had to leave the country. In April 2010, under the conditions of dramatic political struggle, the outgoing regime used the interregional and interethnic disputes to  provoke the tragic events in the south of Kyrgyzstan. There were more than 400  people   killed. The damage for trade, for the transport and housing infrastructure in south of country estimated in hundreds of millions euros. Conflict was stifled  in 4 days, without any  further escalation. Among the consequences of the tragic events there were  complex  socio-economic and political issues, aggravated in spring 2010. Those interethnic clashes jeopardized further democratic changes initiated by April’s revolution  in 2010. It was crucially important to ensure the process of reconstruction as well as to continue the reforms aimed to form  first parliamentary democracy in the region. The new Constitution significantly limited President’s powers.  Parliamentary elections highly welcomed by kyrgyz society  took place in October 2010.  According to the opinion of international  observers there have been conducted really fair and democratic elections. Despite the challenges, the country confidently  moves towards the objectives. Large-scale reform of the judicial system was initiated. In order to provide real independence of judicial system the selection principle for 445 judges was changed. Kyrgyzstan joined the Convention and the facultative protocol for torture prevention. Openness of the society and accountability of the authorities to the people have been  already delivered their first fruits. GDP growth, slightly perceptible, but steady, fluctuates around 9%. Many spheres of the economy have come out of the shadow sector. Increased growth of investment in education and healthcare is observable. On that historically stage  for Kyrgyzstan it is  important to  find  economic and political backing from the international community. The achievements of  the Republic have shown that democratic transformations are real, but  results still remain very fragile. It is crucial for country to  keep the positive trends. There is a huge human potential: strong and consistent civil society, traditions of freedom of speech and independent mass media, gender equality. Next year country  is celebrating  25 years of sovereignty. Government has a  Program to strengthen peace and stability. It is evident the progress is slower than expected and the restored democracy might be threatened. However, obtained experience and comprehension of historical lessons give reliance for transformations’ sustainability. We hope that our development partners will help to carry out the mission until the end and to maintain the absolute rule of law and justice in Kyrgyzstan.