Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XVI, Cyprus; Greece; Turkey

363. Telegram From the Embassy in Turkey to the Department of State ¹

Ankara, March 6, 1968, 1518Z.

4269. NATUS. Subject: Canadian initiative and Ambassadorial calls on Kuchuk. Ref: State 125137, Nicosia 1437.²

1. News reftels that Canadian initiative has stalled while UNSYG pushes forward proposal which Turk Cypriots cannot accept at this juncture bound to be very disappointing to FonMin Caglayangil. Considerable effort which he and Pipinelis made to set up framework for negotiations whereby all parties reasonably safeguarded has now apparently come to naught although four-sided talks may be revived for future use. FonMin will be inclined blame SYG again for coolness to Canadian initiative. He may also conclude he was right when he originally told Canadian Charge (Ankara 4048)³ he could not agree to having SYG briefed prior to approaches to four parties to be invited.

2. When Caglayangil finally agreed at Turkmen’s insistence, it was on condition Canadians would not put pressure on him to accept invitation to discuss matter in some sort of UN forum. Turkmen also mentioned he wanted similar assurances from US and UK but these were never actually solicited. Nevertheless, we believe US, after strong commitment to Canadian initiative, should not turn around and pressure GOT or Turk Cypriots to agree to UNSYG’s proposal. Such action would sit particularly badly with Caglayangil and would weaken whatever influence we have with him. We wonder why, if SYG sent instructions to Osorio-Tafall Feb 29 (Nicosia 1437), he could not have openly so informed Canadian PermRep Ignatieff during meeting Mar 1 (USUN 3999).⁴

3. We have carefully considered whether this might not be good time for resuming Ambassadorial calls on Kuchuk. Following are factors in favor:

A. Ambassadorial call would help us out in Ankara while FonMin digesting bad news on Canadian initiative.

B. It would closely follow UN Rep Tafall’s call on Kuchuk and could therefore be regarded as inquiring into Turk Cypriot views on and responses to Tafall’s proposal.

C. London 6939⁵ suggests FonOff embarrassed by extent of delay in resuming calls.

D. Excuses for not calling are running thin. First, we tried some kind of language to effect we do not accept legality of TCPA or recognize them as government (Nicosia 1143).⁶ Secondly, we explored possibility of maximum numbers of Chiefs of Mission defying ban (Nicosia 1194).⁷ Thirdly, we decided to wait until after Presidential elections. Fourthly, we waited until Canadian initiative launched in order to give it major support. Re Nicosia 1434⁸ we do not feel we should wait until UNSC meeting.

4. Factors against Ambassadorial call seem to rest on fear that possible consequences may be (A) PNG action or (B) deep-freeze treatment. Since calls at this time after considerable delay would not appear as challenging to Makarios’ authority as in January, we wonder whether possibility of PNG action is not now reduced. On other hand, given SYG coolness to any outside initiatives while he still active in field, we think it may be some time before Canadian or other initiative can be started up again. In other words, deep-freeze treatment may not affect US contacts with Greek Cypriots as long and as adversely as once feared.

5. We therefore suggest taking another and urgent look at problem of Ambassadorial calls. Voluntary issuance of disclaimer of recognition of TCPA might soften Makarios’ retaliation, if any.

Hart

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 27 CYP. Secret; Priority; Exdis. Repeated to Athens, London, Nicosia, Ottawa, Rawalpindi, USUN, the Mission to NATO, Adana, Izmir, and Istanbul.
2. In telegram 125137 to Ankara, March 5, the Department of State reported that the Secretary-General had formally proposed to the Makarios government a conference between the two Cypriot communities. (Ibid.) Telegram 1437 from Nicosia, March 6, reported that Canada was taking a “go slow” approach to its initiative while awaiting developments on the Secretary-General’s approach. (Ibid.)
3. Dated February 23. (Ibid.)
4. See footnote 2, Document 362.
5. Dated March 5. (Department of State, Central Files, POL 17 CYP)
6. Telegram 1143 from Nicosia, January 12, described the instructions that U.K. High Commissioner Costar had been authorized to present to the Cypriot Government to deal with the issue of Ambassadorial meetings with Turkish Cypriot representatives. (Ibid., POL 17 US–CYP)
7. Dated January 19. (Ibid.)
8. Not found.