Erato Kozakou Markoulli: “It is unprecedented that a personal envoy of the UN Secretary-General is expected to be appointed for the first time since 1964 instead of an envoy who will be accountable to the Security Council”

[Erato Kozakou Markoulli warns of a very dangerous diversion in the Cyprus issue](https://dialogos.com.cy/poly-epikindyni-ektropi-kypriako-proeidopoiei-erato-kozakoy-markoylli/)

So during the last trilateral meeting between Ersin Tatar, Nicos Anastasiades and Antonio Gutteres in September 2021 (UN General Assemby-NYC) there was a major disagreement regarding the appointment of a UN representative.

Ersin Tatar didn’t accept the appointment of a ‘special envoy’ and instead insisted on the appointment of a ‘personal enovy’. The difference is that a special envoy reports directly to the UN Security Council while a personal envoy will report to the UN Secretary General. For the record every since the five-party Geneva Conference, where Tatar submitted ‘his vision’ for a two-state solution, the UNSG stopped mentioning ‘Bicommunal Bizonal Federation’ as the basis for the solution of the Cyprus problem, whereas the UNSC always mentions that the solution is BBF with political equality. According to former FM of RoC Markoulli this is the first time since 1964(when the UN got directly involved to the Cyprus problem with the establishment of UNFICYP) that a personal envoy is to be appointed.

>Former Foreign Minister Erato Kozakou warns of a very dangerous diversion in the Cyprus issue regarding the appointment of a special envoy on behalf of the United Nations.

>It is unprecedented, she said, that a personal envoy of the UN Secretary-General is expected to be appointed for the first time since 1964 instead of an envoy who will be accountable to the Security Council as has been the case for decades as part of established UN practice.

>Such personal representatives, Ms. Markoullis explained, are appointed only in the very few cases when the Organization is not dealing with the issues under discussion and in most cases it is about internal issues of the states.

[She also talked about the situation Pyla.](https://dialogos.com.cy/erato-kozakoy-markoylli-epilthe-synantilipsi-pyla-choris-kan-na-yparxei/)

The UN always use ambiguity as a way to please both sides and I ll say that’s understandable. It’s usual for the two sides to have different interpretations on some text written to address the worries of both. But this time, with Pyla we saw something completely different. Colin Steward managed to solve the problem by making two separate agreements, one with the GCs and one with the TCs. But for some reason the agreement between UN-GCs isn’t known to the TCs and the agreement between UN-TCs isn’t known to GCs. There is not even a common piece of text about this agreement, a joint agreement/declaratation/paper/document

by Bran37