An 80-year old man was mugged on Friday night in Nicosia, police said.

According to the police report, the pensioner was attacked outside his home, as soon as he exited his car. He told police he was attacked by two men.

The assailants stole €450 he had on him and ran away, according to the police report.

Pope Francis urged 19 freshman cardinals to shun rivalries and factions at an induction ceremony on Saturday where his scandal-plagued predecessor, pope Benedict, made a surprise appearance.

It was the first time Benedict attended a papal rite since his resignation a year ago. His presence offered the remarkable scene of a former pope, a reigning pope and a potentially future pope in St. Peter’s Basilica at the same time.

Rivalry between factions of the Curia, the Vatican’s central administration, was blamed for the mishaps and scandals that dogged Benedict’s eight-year papacy, capped by the so-called “Vatileaks” scandal in 2012 in which Benedict’s butler stole personal documents and leaked them to the media.

Cardinals are the pope’s closest advisers in the Vatican and around the world. Apart from being Church leaders in their home countries, those who are not based in the Vatican are members of key committees in Rome that decide policies that can affect the lives of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics.

Sixteen of the new appointees are “cardinal electors” who will join 106 existing cardinals who are also under 80 and thus eligible to enter a conclave to elect a pope from among their own ranks.

They come from Italy, Germany, Britain, Nicaragua, Canada, Ivory Coast, Brazil, Argentina, South Korea, Chile, Burkina Faso, the Philippines and Haiti. The non-electors come from Italy, Spain and Saint Lucia.

Benedict, 86, who was using a cane, came in through a side entrance and sat quietly wearing a long white overcoat in the front row with cardinals. When he reached the front of the basilica to start the ceremony, Pope Francis greeted Benedict, who took off his white skull cap in a sign of respect and obedience.

Even though the crowd had been asked to refrain from applause during the ceremony, they clapped when Benedict walked in and again when his name was mentioned in an address by one of the new cardinals.

Benedict became the first pope to resign in 600 years when he stepped down on February 28, 2013. Francis was elected the first non-European pope in 1,300 years two weeks later.

SPIRITUALITY AND SERVICE

Francis gave the red-and-white-garbed cardinals their square hat, known as a biretta, and their ring of office in the presence of hundreds of other cardinals and bishops during the solemn ceremony inside Christendom’s largest church.

He urged them to be men of spirituality and service.

“Whenever a worldly mentality predominates, the result is rivalry, jealousy, factions,” he said.

Francis urged cardinals to remain united. “The Church … needs you, your cooperation, and even more your communion, communion with me and among yourselves,” he said.

His choice emphasised his concern for poor countries.

The new cardinal electors are aged 55 to 74. From Latin America are Archbishop Aurelio Poli, 66, Francis’s successor in the Argentine capital, and the archbishops of Managua in Nicaragua, Rio de Janeiro in Brazil and Santiago in Chile.

Two are from Africa - the archbishops of Ouagadougou in Burkina Faso and Abidjan in Ivory Coast. From Asia are the archbishops of Seoul in South Korea and Cotabato in the Philippines.

Archbishop Chibly Langlois, 55, is the first cardinal from Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, where according to the World Bank some 80 percent of the rural population lives in abject poverty. The Philippines, Nicaragua, Ivory Coast and Brazil also have high rates of poverty.

Only four of the cardinal electors are Vatican officials, chief among them Italian Archbishop Pietro Parolin, 59, Francis’s new secretary of state, and Archbishop Gerhard Mueller, 66, the German head of the Vatican’s doctrinal congregation.

John Terry grabbed a stoppage-time winner as leaders Chelsea showed their Premier League title mettle by snatching a 1-0 victory over Everton on Saturday having looked set to suffer another damaging blow.

The Chelsea captain strained every sinew to get a faint touch to a Frank Lampard free kick in the 93rd minute and keep his team a point clear of Arsenal who thrashed Sunderland 4-1 and three ahead of Manchester City who beat Stoke City 1-0.

After drawing their last league game against West Bromwich Albion and suffering a chastening FA Cup defeat to rivals Manchester City, Jose Mourinho’s side were looking for a morale-boosting return to form.

Yet they looked sluggish for most of the match and after finally sparking into life they came up against a stubborn Everton rearguard that only crumbled deep into added time.

West Brom’s Matej Vydra snatched an 86th-minute equaliser to earn a 1-1 draw against Fulham, denying the London club a win that would have moved them off the foot of the table.

Fulham stay a point behind Cardiff City whose sorry season hit a new low after a 4-0 home defeat by Hull City.

Hull are now six points clear of trouble and one point behind West Ham United who continued their recent resurgence with a 3-1 win over Southampton.

Russia leapt to the top of the medals table on Saturday with two more golds as the Sochi Olympics entered the final stretch, and the host nation said its first Winter Games had helped “break the ice” of scepticism towards it.

Organisers were confident they had achieved what they, and President Vladimir Putin, had set out to do – project Russia as a modern, tolerant country that had thrown off the shackles of its Soviet past.

The icing on the cake was home gold in the men’s snowboard parallel slalom and men’ biathlon relay, lifting Russia above Norway in the rankings with just three more titles to be decided on Sunday, the final day.

“The friendly faces, the warm Sochi sun and the glare of the Olympic gold have broken the ice of scepticism towards the new Russia,” said Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Kozak, also Putin’s Olympics organiser.

“The Games have turned our country, its culture and the people into something that is a lot closer and more appealing and understandable for the rest of the world.”

The jury is still out over whether the world agrees, but Putin is likely to be generally pleased that the Games went smoothly, without security scares despite Islamist militant threats and only isolated expressions of dissent to his rule.

There have been problems, however.

On Saturday, the Ukraine National Olympic Committee said cross-country skier Marina Lisogor had failed a doping test, a day after a German and Italian athlete were thrown out of Sochi for taking banned substances.

Protest group Pussy Riot came to Sochi and drew attention to criticism of Russia’s human rights record, and the women’s figure skating competition was overshadowed by a judging scandal deemed to have favoured the hosts over South Korea’s Kim Yuna.

Russia’s role in the crisis in neighbouring Ukraine also came under scrutiny when a Ukrainian skier pulled out of the Games in protest against her government, and athletes from the team asked to wear black armbands to honour those killed in violent street protests.

But in general the thrills and spills on snow and ice have captured the imagination, and Saturday provided another action-packed day in Sochi and amidst the snow-capped peaks of the Caucasus Mountains towering in the distance.

RUSSIA WILD FOR WILD

One of the most popular medals of the day was a second Sochi gold for Russian snowboarder Vic Wild in the men’s parallel slalom. In the women’s event, Austrian Julia Dujmovits won.

“Beyond believable,” said the 27-year-old Wild, who staged a remarkable second-run comeback in the semi-final.

“When I came to the Olympics and showed up, I had already won. To win the other day was the greatest feeling of my life. I can’t believe it.”

Wild has faced criticism in his native United States, having become a Russian citizen after marrying Alena Zavarzina, the women’s giant slalom bronze medallist in Sochi, in 2011.

“No matter what you do in your life, people are going to hate you,” he told a news conference. “If you’re good at something, people are going to hate you.”

Questions have also been raised about Russia’s short track speed skater Viktor Ahn, who has won three gold medals in Sochi for his adopted country, having won three for his native South Korea in 2006 as Ahn Hyun-soo.

“In Korea the fact that I changed citizenship has been widely discussed, and some articles I read make me feel uneasy,” Ahn told reporters on Saturday, speaking through a translator.

“The most important thing is … that I perform for this country and I am happy that I managed to win medals for this country.”

On another day of glorious sunshine, Russia’s second gold came in the men’s biathlon relay.

There was joy for Norway in the women’s event, when “Iron Lady” Marit Bjoergen signed off with her third gold of the Games in the 30 km cross-country skiing, matching her haul in Vancouver.

Compatriot Therese Johaug took silver and Kristin Stoermer Steira, also Norwegian, claimed bronze in a rare clean sweep.

The flying Dutch men and women wrapped up the Sochi speed skating competition by cruising to both team pursuit titles.

The two golds, both won in Olympic record times, took the Dutch tally to eight out of a possible 12 at the Adler Arena, which included four medal sweeps in the 10 individual events.

It was a show of power like no other at a Winter Olympics.

The Soviet Union won six golds in the sport at the 1960 Games, while South Korea matched the half dozen in short track at the 2006 Turin Games.

In the day’s final title to be decided, Austria’s Mario Matt became the oldest winner of an Olympic Alpine skiing gold at 34 when he edged out team mate Marcel Hirscher in a thrilling slalom.

And in the men’s ice hockey bronze medal match, Finland trounced the United States 5-0.

CLOSING CEREMONY

The biggest sporting event still to come is the men’s ice hockey final at the futuristic Bolshoy Ice Dome on Sunday, pitting reigning champions Canada against Sweden, who won the competition in Turin in 2006.

The last act of the Feb. 7-23 Olympics will be the closing ceremony at the Fisht Stadium on the Black Sea coast, one of several gleaming new arenas constructed at huge cost for what are widely believed to be the most expensive Games ever held.

Marco Balich, artistic executive producer of Sunday’s spectacle, said that it would present a different side of Russia to the opening ceremony, which was a muscular expression of the country’s strength, pride and progress.

“As grand as the opening was, with this one they went for another side of Russia - intimate, full of heart, and they (Russian organisers) mentioned the word ‘nostalgia’,” Balich told Reuters.

The exact contents were a closely guarded secret, but again the scale and sophistication would impress, he said.

“For sure it will be the biggest Winter Olympics closing ceremony ever.”

By Nicos Rolandis

FOR OVER 60 years Cypriot politicians have possessed a special talent. Whenever the hope of springtime appears on the horizon, when the halcyon days – which Zeus granted to mankind – are about to shine, some politicians know how to bring winter back again.

Whenever even a small possibility appears of getting rid of the suffocating feeling of the Turkish occupation which poisons our lives, some politicians try to think of one hundred reasons why this should not happen. They try to “kill” what is feasible. This has been the attitude for years.

I remember, when the Anglo American Canadian plan was proposed in 1978, and later in 1983 when the “Indicators” were submitted by the United Nations, my office was inundated with dozens of studies and comments by all sorts by “experts” from Greece and Cyprus, all busy splitting hairs. Year after year, the occupation has become rooted so deep into the ground that I personally have many doubts whether a reversal of the situation is possible. As a result of the perennial inaction the occupied part of Cyprus has been turned into Asia Minor, Pontos, Constantinopolis.

President Nicos Anastasiades signed recently a joint declaration which, after 40 years of occupation, was very difficult to achieve. It provides for a single legal international personality, a single sovereignty and a single united Cyprus citizenship. It also provides that the union in whole or in part of Cyprus with any other country, its partition or secession or unilateral change to the state of affairs, are prohibited.

So, what is it that we fear? How could our country ever be divided into two parts or united wholly or partly with, say, Turkey, as long as such actions are prohibited?

However, if things go wrong again, if the blunders and sins of the past reoccur, irrespective of what a “joint declaration” may provide, is there anything which may stop a strong and ruthless country like Turkey from turning everything upside down as she did in 1974? Who is going to prevent her in practical terms? Who stopped her in 1974? Could a “correct” joint declaration ever stop her?

It is more than clear that the future of Cyprus will depend much more on the wisdom and correct judgement of her people, than on anything else.

In addition, there are two questions which hover in the air and have to be addressed:

First, has Turkey made even one concession thus far to justify a new negotiation?

The Turks are very hard negotiators. Former UN Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim told me 35 years ago that he considered the Turks the most difficult negotiators, after the South Africans and the Israelis.

In the case of Cyprus, however, there has been some giving way by our side and also by the Turkish side compared to the initial stands of the 1950s and1960s. In those years we were after union with Greece (enosis), whilst the Turkish Cypriots were fighting for partition (taksim). Through the High Level Agreements of 1977 and 1979 and in the years that followed, a golden mean, a compromise was struck: the bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality as described in the Security Council Resolutions.

And there is something else we must always have in mind in connection with the above question. We may have given away in the past a little more than the Turks. However, is it the Turks or ourselves who lost a war in 1974, which was the direct consequence of the Greek coup d’ etat? Is it the Turks or ourselves who lost their land, their homes, their churches? Is it the Turks or ourselves who are threatened by a mighty army of 40,000 soldiers, covered by air and navy forces, which we cannot confront in an effective manner if the worst comes to the worst? So, in whose interest would a solution work? Which side has a good reason to negotiate? Is it our side or the Turkish Cypriot side?

The second issue is this: the existing process of talks has yielded no results, so we must look for something else.

Of course nobody says clearly what this “something else” might be. Is it war? Is it partition? Is it endless inaction which has already solidified the status of occupation? Is it a campaign to enlighten the world community (quite ludicrous, 50 years after 1963)?

However, let us see how correct the allegation is that talks have never resulted in anything.

In an article of mine in January 2008, I set forth 15 plans which were proposed to us from 1948 (Consultative Assembly) until 2002 (Annan Plan) as a solution to our problem. We rejected almost all of them. So, which are the ineffective processes to which we refer? Are they the ones we have been rejecting during the past 60 years which are getting worse and worse as time goes by, because the faits-accomplis are gradually solidified?

I believe that the most important initiative we had after the invasion, was the Anglo-American-Canadian Plan of November 1978. I handled the plan throughout from the very beginning to the end. The plan was supported by three important countries with a lot of influence on Turkey. The US President Jimmy Carter received us in the White House in October 1978, a month before the plan was handed over. The Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, the Deputy and the Assistant Secretaries Warren Christopher and Matthew Nimetz were all directly involved. The plan in real terms provided for the conversion of the 1960 unitary state into a federal state. The residents of Varosha would go back to their homes once the talks started and would stay there irrespective of the outcome of the talks. Despite the efforts of some of us to get it through, our side rejected the. We also rejected all other initiatives which ensued. And nowadays we complain that the dialogue process is ineffective!

President Anastasiades has an extremely difficult task ahead. The Americans support his efforts, 36 years after their 1978 plan. At that time Nimetz had told us that Ankara’s response had been positive. Back in 1978 there were no settlers, nor huge Turkish investments, nor Greek Cypriot properties occupied. Time had not killed the potential for a solution.

I personally wish the president the best of success. I do not know what will follow. Forty years of occupation cannot be easily written off, so the task will be anything from difficult to impossible. This is something which was never realised by the supporters of negation and of the long term struggle, who have in reality destroyed this country.

We should give the halcyon days another chance, even if their appearance in the skies seems unlikely.

Nicos Rolandis is a former minister of foreign affairs and commerce and industry, former deputy and former president of the Liberal Party

By Loucas Charalambous

ON FEBRUARY 14 I was patient (or masochistic?) enough to sit through a farce of a show broadcast by the CyBC. The star was some character presenting himself as ‘the cleverest Greek in the world’, who came up with an incredible amount of nonsense.

It was an interview showcasing silliness rather than intelligence. If the torrent of stupidities unleashed by the ‘cleverest Greek in the world’, was anything to go by, I am sure that if they were to measure my intelligence I would be declared the cleverest Greek in the universe. After all I do not say one tenth of the nonsense uttered by this guy.

The show began with a demonstration of the cleverest Greek man’s suspect grasp of Greek grammar, but the presenter was so in awe of him that she felt unable to challenge him. Her admiration for him could not be dented, as she constantly reminded viewers that this was ‘the cleverest Greek with a seal of approval’.

The show had to move on to the Cyprus problem so that we could be enlightened by the cleverest Greek’s knowledge and understanding of politics. At the suggestion that time may be working against the Greek Cypriots, he said: “Time works always in our favour when we are on the side of justice. I have never seen, not even one example, of it not being in our favour.”

The crafty presenter tried to catch him out here, reminding him that we have not taken back Constantinople yet. Unable to believe the presenter’s inability to see the obvious, he embarked on the following ‘explanation’.

“That we will take back Constantinople is certain. The thing is I do not know whether you know what you are talking about…. settlers have been living and thriving there for so many years. The way is simple – the economy. The Church is there. They will leave because of the economy. Why don’t you look at the example of Greece with 400 years of (Turkish) occupation? I do not understand. The occupation army has not left? Why are you stuck on 40 years?”

I have never before heard so much incoherent nonsense. He claims the economy would kick 14 million Turks out of Constantinople. So we should not be in a hurry and get stuck on the 40 years of Turkish occupation. The ‘cleverest Greek’ suggests we should wait for another 400 years for the occupation to end. Then, all the settlers and occupation army would leave and we would take back Kyrenia, Famagusta, Morphou and Constantinople.

Just think of the wild celebrations we will have. The CyBC which informed us of this joyful news should start preparations for the celebratory events.

Yet I consider it a trifle unjust that the cleverest Greek is now taking the credit for the policy of biding our time. The father of this policy is the late ambassador Michalis Dountas. He first expounded it 25 years ago, so he deserves the title of the cleverest Greek in the world.

For weeks now, the CyBC has been broadcasting announcements inviting its audiences to propose changes so that “we can create the CyBC we all want.” But why would we want to change it? We pay some €30 million every year to keep it going and we like it the way it is. If it changes, who will make people laugh?

Who will host the ‘cleverest Greek in the world’ to assure us that we would get a better settlement of the Cyprus problem if we waited 400 years and to stop us from getting stressed over the 40 years of Turkish occupation?

This is the kind of public broadcaster we, who pay these millions every year, want – the CyBC, with its smart presenters and even smarter guests, that does not shy away from silliness or stupidity.

By Peter Stevenson

THE RED fox plays a useful role in agriculture by reducing the numbers of harmful rodents and locusts yet efforts are being made to allow the hunting of this Cypriot native, an animal welfare group has warned.

DISY MP and former head of the Cyprus Hunting Association Andreas Kyprianou, aided by the Game Fund, is trying to pass legislation which will allow fox hunting.

Kyprianou claimed in a letter to parliament last month that the rising number of foxes in recent years is directly linked to the diminishing number of hares. He has received the backing of the Game Fund even though a report last September by that government department clearly stated that the two events were not related.

“The hare population has decreased minimally in comparison to last year which is statistically negligible. The percentage fluctuates depending on the season and district,” the report said.

The general picture of hare population, according to the report is down to three factors. The first is down to a disease hares suffered last year between January and April which affected hares during their mating season. The second is a result of various illegal activities which include poaching and allowing hunting dogs to roam in areas where they are not allowed. The third is the large numbers of hunters which adds extra pressure on hare numbers even when hunted legally.

“The fox population has risen by 17 per cent in comparison to last year and is the largest fox population recorded which means the relevant authorities need to consider how to handle the animal,” the Game Fund report concluded.

Strongly opposed to the DISY proposal is the Initiative/Intervention for the Protection of the Cyprus Fox which has gathered almost 1,500 names on a petition to reject any legislation which would see fox hunting legalised.

“They claim foxes are impacting hunting species and that is the main reason they want to introduce this legislation. How about controlling the impact of hunting which is the main impact on the hunting species?” a representative from the initiative told the Sunday Mail.

The initiative feels that there are a number of misconceptions about foxes.

“People say that foxes have a negative impact on agriculture, but that’s not true. They often help agriculture as they are natural predators of rats and less so of rabbits or hares. There have been a number of studies that show that,” the representative said.
Despite these facts, and despite its own report – which did not mention that foxes posed a danger to other animals or the ecosystem – the head of the Game Fund Pantelis Hadjigerou said foxes were having a negative impact.

“Animal farmers and hunters put poison out to cull the number of foxes which have serious consequences as that poison can be ingested by hunting dogs and other animals,” he told a recent House environment committee meeting.

Because of its ability to adapt to any type of habitat, the Cyprus red fox is found throughout the island: highlands, lowlands and coastal areas, dense forests, areas with shrubbery, parks and even close to populated areas depending on the availability of food. Usually it lives in caves, dense shrubs or in holes.

It’s an endemic subspecies, and the only carnivorous mammal in Cyprus. Because it was considered harmful for livestock and the hunter’s prey, it has been hunted mercilessly in the past causing the population to decline significantly overall.

If you want to help the Initiative reach their goal of 1,500 signatures to prevent foxes from becoming permissible game you can visit the page: www.change.org/petitions/we-demand-the-protection-of-the-cyprus-fox

By Elias Hazou

“BITCOIN isn’t going away,” confidently declares Danny Brewster, seated in a swivel chair in his Nicosia office.

Well, he would say that wouldn’t he? Then again, the young CEO of Neo & Bee has a lot riding on the project. Brewster has invested €6m of his own money into Neo& Bee, his brainchild. Whatever you may think about the bitcoin currency, it’s hard to shake off the feeling that Brewster and the people behind him have done their homework. Time will tell, but this doesn’t sound like a flash in the pan.

Tomorrow bitcoin marketers Neo& Bee open for business, the culmination of several months of preparations. They will initially be offering customers brand bitcoin wallets.

Explains Brewster: “Neo and Bee are two separate brands that fall under the same roof. Neo is a physical portal for people to get educated on the bitcoin technology. They can also buy bitcoins directly from us, but we won’t sell to them until we know they got the right understanding of the technology.”

That’s the Neo part. Coming soon is Bee, a payment network for merchants. In the future the company will be providing merchants with the physical hardware (POS terminals), or an online portal to accept payments in bitcoin.

And once merchants accept a payment in bitcoin, Neo & Bee will offer them the option of buying back those bitcoins from them instantly, so the merchants aren’t exposed to the current market volatility of the crypto currency.

“It’s not going to be a bank,” says Brewster. “A bank does lending. All we are is an exchange and a hosted wallet provider. We can’t put our hands into customers’ wallets and take that money and gamble and create more money, like a bank does.

“If a customer has a wallet with us, and they buy bitcoins they deposit with themselves. And even if we don’t exist they can still access and use those bitcoins. This is the first real alternative to banking. The beauty of bitcoin is that you become your own bank.”

What’s bitcoin? It’s a peer-to-peer digital currency that functions without a central authority. The crypto-currency was first introduced in January 2009 by a person (or persons, no one knows for sure) going by the handle ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’.

The digital currency is stored in anonymous “electronic wallets,” or code, and can travel from one wallet to another by means of an online peer-to-peer network transaction. Think BitTorrent, but with money.

Bitcoin uses a shared transaction database called the “block chain”, or log, to achieve distributed consensus about coin ownership. Once accepted, transactions can’t be undone or denied. And it’s open source.

Now a lot has been said about bitcoin – it’s just another bubble that will pop, etc. Yet even the most gung-ho advocate will tell you not to put all your wealth into this digital currency.

Brewster takes a similar line: “If an individual decides for themselves to buy them, we will facilitate that. But you’ll never find me or anyone else saying ‘go out and buy bitcoin.”

What with the ‘Silk Road’ incident, Brewster freely concedes that bitcoin is susceptible to money laundering.

“But contrary to what has been written about bitcoin, I don’t know any smart criminal that would use a system that keeps a log, a record that can never be changed and in 10 years’ time can come back and bite you.

“So we at Neo need to know who you are. We check that against PEPs (Politically Exposed Persons) lists and sanctions lists. It’s not just a case of any Tom, Dick or Harry walking in to open a wallet.”

How will Neo & Bee make their money?

“A lot is made through our own reserves in bitcoin. When we sell bitcoins we have our own index price, so we’ll make on that spread. Plus we have our own trading desk. Also, when a merchant accepts a payment we’ll buy the bitcoins off them instantly…essentially we’re going long on bitcoin. We believe in it.

“Whereas if we were to hold everything in euros, we know that the European Central Bank can go and press ‘Print’ a few more times.”

Neo & Bee is part of Part of LMB subsidiaries, a UK-based company. So their main profits aren’t made in Cyprus, but rather around the world through their other operations, such as the Neo Easy Coin online platform.

At this point let’s explain the difference between lowercase bitcoin and uppercase Bitcoin. The former is the digital currency. It’s just one application of Bitcoin, which encompasses the broader technology.

‘Satoshi Nakamoto’ designed the original Bitcoin protocol in 2008 and launched the network in 2009.Without getting too techie, the protocol for the first time satisfactorily solved the distributed consensus problem – how to get thousands of different computer systems to agree to a single dataset and timeline. It was a huge leap in computer science.

That’s where it gets exciting. Going forward, and as the Bitcoin protocol is tweaked, people will be able to use it for such things as legal contracts, derivatives and so on. The possibilities are virtually endless.

And that’s what Neo & Bee are eventually looking to tap into. At some point, they’d like to offer derivatives, futures and stock options. Right now bitcoin is not considered a financial instrument here, and the company have been talking to the Securities and Exchange Commission in the hopes of changing that.

Should they succeed, Cyprus could well become the first regulated bitcoin derivatives market in the world; but this needs to be done fast, because others are already working on the idea.

Brewster says he’s already in talks with investors for hundreds of millions to come into the country. His outfit, he claims, can bring an extra €200m into the economy within the first year, just from their other operations.

The aim is to set Cyprus up as an “incubator” for bitcoin business, enabling entrepreneurs to come here, creating jobs and cross-selling opportunities.

“The first place that forms a concise set of rules will enable so much movement into the economy to provide the right environment. Right now everything is up in the air. A lot of people are expecting to move to the best jurisdiction to set up shop.”

If that happens, Brewster likens this Mediterranean island to a potential Silicon Valley for a Bitcoin industry.

And Neo & Bee aren’t skimping on software development either. So far they’ve spent well over €5m, and have cobbled together a team of 25 developers, including some of the brightest computer science minds in the world. Tellingly, they’ve engaged leading Bitcoin evangelist and entrepreneur Andreas Antonopoulos as a distributed systems consultant.

There appears to be a lot more going on here than just bitcoin the currency, which may or may not turn out to be just another Ponzi scheme. Like it or not, Bitcoin with a capital ‘B’ is here to stay.

By Constantinos Psillides

SOLDIERS should not hold out unrealistic hopes that government plans to reduce military service to as little as 14 months will be implemented in time to benefit the present military intake, the defence ministry has warned.

The ministry of defence announced two weeks ago that plans to implement President Nicos Anastasiades’ election pledge to slash military service from 24 months to 14 were finally ready, though the ministry warned they were also considering a military service of up to 18 months.

The news of a reduction was greeted with widespread relief by serving national guardsmen and those due to be called up in the near future, but the possibly outgoing Minister of Defence Fotis Fotiou – a member of the DIKO party, which is poised to leave the coalition – told the Sunday Mail this week that the reduction will take “careful planning” and should not be done hastily.

“Our plan is to reduce military service through careful planning, as a part of the complete overhaul of our military,” he told the newspaper. “The plan is ready and the only thing that remains is to settle on a number of months, so as to not compromise the National Guard.”

He said there was also the option of gradually reducing military service. “It will depend on a multitude of factors and conditions,” Fotiou said.

Although not mentioned specifically by the minister, one of these “conditions” is likely to be the recent progress in negotiations on the Cyprus problem. Peace talks have resumed and for the first time the two sides will be working based on a joint declaration. A solution to the Cyprus problem would abolish obligatory military service. Although the two sides are still far from reaching a solution, the possibility cannot be ignored, making the defence ministry hesitant over tackling a problem that might not exist in a few years’ time.

Resentment over military service has grown rapidly in recent years leading to a sharp rise in the number of teenage boys seeking ways to avoid serving. Although the ministry refuses to release official figures, reports in 2010 suggested that around 20 per cent of conscripts were getting out of military service, mainly on psychological grounds.

Defence Minister – for now – Fotis Fotiou

Fotiou told the Sunday Mail that the long military service had obviously led to an increase in draft-dodging in general and that he hoped the planned reduction would provide a solution. “A comprehensive strategy is needed to battle this phenomenon,” he said.

But while the ministry may be ready with its plans, there are still many political, legal and logistical hurdles ahead. A source inside the defence ministry told the Sunday Mail this week that even if everything went without a hitch, the plan “probably wouldn’t” affect young men who were currently serving.

“For the plan to be implemented in the summer of 2014, everything has to go as planned and everyone should agree to it without changing anything. That hasn’t been our experience thus far when it comes to changing things in the army,” the source said.

Such pessimism has already been borne out. With its plans now finalised, the ministry has to present them to the House defence committee. This was supposed to have happened on February 12, but the date was pushed back to the end of February because the committee discussed instead how the army would be affected by the privatisation of semi governmental organisations (telecommunications authority, electricity authority and ports authority).

The next hurdle is to convince the members of the committee, especially the chairman, EDEK MP Giorgos Varnava. The socialist party has always had strong ties with the military. The party leader and House president Yiannakis Omirou served as defence minister during the Glafcos Clerides’ second term (1998-2003) but resigned in 1999 following the S-300 scandal, when a missile weapon system bought by Cyprus from Russia ended up in nearby Crete. Omirou was also chairman of the defence committee for his last two terms, vacating the position to become president of the House.

Varnava, who took the reins after his party leader left, is considered a “hard-liner” on defence spending. Taking into consideration recent developments in the Cyprus problem, with EDEK strongly opposing the joint declaration, any chance to paint the government as “weak on defence” – including a cut in military service – would likely be too good an opportunity for parliamentarians to miss.

As a taste of the battle ahead, the defence minister had to appear before the House defence committee last October to give assurances that “the National Guard’s combat effectiveness wouldn’t be compromised due to cutbacks”.

Another concern now with the departure of DIKO from the government looming strong and the resulting resignation of Fotiou if the party’s central committee rubberstamps Friday night’s vote in favour of quitting, the whole process might have to start over again.

And even if this does not happen, and the defence committee agrees to the changes in military service, the changes have to be put before a vote at the House plenum where it can be delayed yet again.

Away from the political arena, the wait and uncertainty are taking their toll on families with army age sons.

A mother sees her son off on conscription day

One mother, Tania (not her real name) is pessimistic over the defence ministry’s plan to reduce military service. Her 19-year-old son started the army last summer, and she has another aged 15.

“I don’t think it will be implemented in time to affect my son. Maybe my youngest will benefit. It remains to be seen,” she said, adding that maybe solving the Cyprus problem would put an end to military service.

She deeply resents the length of service and views the 24 months her oldest son is likely to serve as a waste of valuable, potentially productive years of her son’s life.

“When he goes off to the university he will have to compete with 17 and 18-year-olds, fresh out of school. He hasn’t hit the books in two years. It will take him time to adapt,” she said.

And if the economic crisis is a major reason behind the ministry of defence’s reform of the army, she says the army makes significant inroads into the family budget.

“We spend more money to feed our son now that he has joined the army than when he was at home. The army provides soldiers with food, but most of the times it’s inedible. Food in the army is presentable only when an official visits the camp but on any other day, they just don’t care,” says Tania.

Sarah, another concerned mother, doesn’t hold back any punches when it comes to the military service. Like Tania, Sarah has a son who was called up last summer. Her younger son is due to start in 2015.

“This is an utter waste of time when they could be studying or working,” Sarah (not her real name) remarks. “The military is nothing more than state-sanctioned prison for males. “

Asked whether she is hopeful that either of her sons will benefit from the proposed changes, Sarah confesses she is not optimistic. “The army is a gravy train for certain segments of society. They won’t give up easily,” she said.

Sarah’s scathing comments have weight.  The army buys a number of services from the private sector which are directly linked to the military service, food supply, for example. Reducing military service would greatly affect the profits of these often well-connected service providers.

Yet, the army has no choice but to cut costs. The defence ministry’s budget for 2014 is €319 million, down about 8 per cent from 2013 when it was €347 mil. One of the goals of the ministry’s yet unveiled modernisation plan is to further reduce the budget, in accordance with the austerity measures imposed by the troika of lenders.

Defence spending on military equipment is also under more scrutiny than ever before. Plans to buy two Israeli-made gun boats were hastily scrapped last December, after it became known that the boats would cost over €100 million. Public uproar forced the state to rethink its plan and shelve the buy.

The military also has a costly problem over the promotion of officers. Officers are supposed to be promoted a rank after serving four years at their current rank, which of course comes along with a pay raise. The practice inevitably led to a bulky, pricey cluster in the higher echelons of the military. The defence ministry is now desperately trying to find a way to accommodate the bursting ranks of its officers.

While the current situation is considered widely unacceptable – including by the government – it remains to be seen when the defence ministry will finally go through with its promise to improve conditions.

This is of little comfort to Tania, Sarah or hundreds of other families.

“My son has been serving for nearly a year. Can I have him back now?” asks Sarah.

THE DECISION to leave the government, taken by the DIKO executive office at midnight on Friday, was the best gift President Anastasiades could have received on the completion of his first year in office. He has been set free from the shackles of an alliance partner that has always championed the politics of negativity and hollow rhetoric, disguised as high principles and patriotism.

Anastasiades is now free to focus on the pursuit of a Cyprus settlement, without pandering to the DIKO leadership and wasting his time on finding ways of keeping it on side. He will no longer have to tread carefully for fear of angering Nicolas Papadopoulos whose only objective on the Cyprus problem is maintaining the status quo.

Papadopoulos’ most meaningful proposal to Anastasiades, before the agreement on the joint declaration, was that he should engage in talks that led nowhere. He wanted talks for the sake of talks, like those conducted during the presidency of his father, when the negotiators of the two sides had more than 100 meetings without agreeing anything. The DIKO chief wanted the president to deceive the Greek Cypriots, the UN, the EU, the US and the Turkish side by engaging in talks he would have no intention of ever concluding.

Now, Anastasiades does not even have to pretend to be interested in these absurd suggestions. He will also have finally realised that his oft-repeated plan for collective decision-making on the Cyprus problem by the National Council is totally unrealistic. This could never have happened with parties like DIKO and EDEK whose only reason for existing is to utter hard-line platitudes and oppose any attempt to solve the Cyprus problem.

The question that Anastasiades should ask is how many people do the naysayers actually represent? They do make a lot of noise because there is quite a few of them but that in no way means they reflect majority opinion. Electorally speaking, the hard-line parties do not represent more than a third of the voters, assuming all their supporters were opposed to a settlement.

Even the DIKO executive office was divided over leaving the government – only 22 of the 39 members voted in favour, while 15 voted against. The opposition to the joint declaration was not universal and more than one third of the party’s executive office did not share their leader’s view about it; there were deputies that spoke out against it in public. It will be interesting to see how the party’s Central Committee will vote on the executive’s proposal for leaving the government on Wednesday.

Papadopoulos may have acted rashly in taking DIKO out of the government, but it was the right thing to do. His party could not have remained the junior partner of an alliance that was sincerely committed to a settlement. Now it can step up its anti-settlement rhetoric, carry on calling Anastasiades a liar and arguing in favour of partition, which is what opposition to the peace process constitutes.

As for Anastasiades, he should allow DIKO and the rest of the hard-liners to continue their negative rhetoric, because it exposes their political bankruptcy. The fact is that they have nothing constructive or pragmatic to offer as an alternative to negotiations and an increasing number of people are becoming aware of this. All the alternatives – from the unyielding struggle to the European solution via the ECHR – to the peace process proposed by the rejectionist camp have been exposed as the fantasies they were.

There are no more false hopes to offer an increasingly sceptical public. The only road ahead is the one leading to a settlement and with DIKO quitting the government there will be nothing holding Anastasiades back.

By Constantinos Psillides

THE four DIKO ministers serving in the coalition were yesterday said to be furious that the party’s executive ruled they should not resign until March 4, a week after the central committee is expected to ratify – or not – Friday’s vote to quit the government.

Reports suggested that the ministers were given until March 4 to resign only in order to be able to collect the bonus they are entitled to when they complete one year in office. That falls on March 1. The reports sparked public outrage, with people calling on President Nicos Anastasiades to reshuffle his cabinet immediately.

The Sunday Mail has learned however, that at least one DIKO cabinet member, Energy Minister Giorgos Lakkotrypis, would leave office immediately if the central committee, this coming Wednesday, rubberstamps the executive body’s vote.

Lakkotrypis, who is seen as an extremely competent and popular minister, tweeted that “having experienced last night’s [Friday’s] events, my options are now clear”.

The other ministers were silent yesterday on the bonus issue, neither denying nor confirming they would follow the energy minster’s example and resign immediately.

But it was reported that during Friday’s eight-hour marathon they had accused the executive, and DIKO leader Nicolas Papadopoulos, of making them a target of public ridicule by suggesting the date in question.

Health Minister, Petros Petrides was yesterday quoted as saying that executive’s March-4 ruling had served only to portray the ministers as money-hungry.

Petrides, talking on Astra Radio, spoke of “this public humiliation”, and accused Papadopoulos of trying to pass a motion during Friday’s meeting that would forbid the four ministers from voting on whether DIKO should remain in the coalition. DIKO spokeswoman Christiana Erotokritou had refused to comment on the accusations, the radio station reported.

Defence Minister Fotis Fotiou yesterday limited himself to a Facebook posting saying it was time to show responsibility towards the country. “These critical times call for political stability and national unity,” he posted.

There was no comment yesterday from the fourth DIKO minister, Education’s Kyriacos Kenevezos.

It is believed all four do not want to leave the cabinet and on Friday had voted in favour of staying in the coalition.

Only last week, the four DIKO ministers met on an unrelated subject but in their public statements called for unity among political parties, a sideswipe at Papadopoulos.

In fact it appears that Papadopoulos – the main advocate for dissolving the coalition had a hard time convincing all the members of the executive on the merits of his proposal to withdraw, which are based on Anastasiades’ handling of the Cyprus problem.

Friday’s decision was split with 22 members of the executive in favour of withdrawing to 15 against and two abstentions – MP Fytos Constantinou and Morphou district committee chair Andreas Meraklis.

Papadopoulos has been in a tit-for-tat correspondence of legalese with Anastasiades for weeks over the content of the joint declaration that cleared the way for Cyprus negotiations to begin on February 11.

He insists Anastasiades has broken his pre-election pledge to DIKO – without whose support he would not have been elected – and that the declaration was nothing more than a resurrection of the hated 2004 Annan plan.

Long-time Papadopoulos rival and former DIKO leader himself, Marios Garoyian, told Sigma TV that he believes that the party shouldn’t leave the coalition but should instead stay “monitor the situation up close so the party can maintain its regulatory role”. However Garoyian made clear that, as a life-long party man, he would respect the central committee’s decision, whatever it might be. Garoyian was narrowly defeated by Papadopoulos on December 1, last year – 51 per cent to 49 per cent – and still holds sway among the party base.

DIKO’s deputy head Marcos Kyprianou also seems to be of the opinion that the party shouldn’t act hastily in withdrawing. Reports say that in his speech before the executive, Kyprianou called for a meeting with Anastasiades to discuss his intentions on the Cyprus problem.

Also, it is clear that since the second phase of the DIKO elections, Papadopoulos’ control over the central committee is far from tight. An overthrow of his proposal on Wednesday would be a major defeat for the new party president and call his leadership into serious doubt.

And while DIKO struggles to deal with internal strife, the palace has made it clear it would not interfere.

Government spokesman Christos Stylianides said in written statement yesterday that Anastasiades was determined to maintain stability in the country and would wait for DIKO to complete their internal procedures before making any decisions.

“The government respects all political party internal procedures and as a matter of principle does not interfere,” said Stylianides, adding that the president was determined to go through with his plan for the economy and to keep trying to find a solution to the Cyprus problem.

However, a DIKO withdrawal would in fact leave Anastasiades free to forge ahead with settlement talks without having to pander to his junior partners who are widely seen as favouring the status quo over a federal settlement.

Stylianides said Anastasiades had not broken promises made to DIKO on the Cyprus issue, and would continue to honour the agreement he made prior to his election.

He said the joint declaration was not the final solution but merely a starting point for negotiations.

Ruling DISY leader, Averof Neophytou said yesterday that any decision made by DIKO would be respected. He said DISY would not forget DIKO’s support “in the effort to bring stability to the Cypriot economy”.

Neophytou also said his party wanted to hold on to the bridges with DIKO for the good of the country.

“Times are tough for our country and political instability will not help us to stabilise the economy,” he said.

DIKO said in its statement on Friday night the party would maintain a “responsible stance” in parliament when it came to legislation relating to the island’s bailout programme.

A bomb killed a boy and wounded 24 people in a busy shopping district in the Thai capital on Sunday, hours after supporters of Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra promised to get tough with demonstrators paralysing parts of the city.

The bomb went off near one of the few large protest sites remaining, leaving blood and sandals on the streets near the huge Central World shopping mall, much of it in front of a shop selling tee-shirts emblazoned “Land of Smile”.

Three children suffered serious head injuries, Erawan Medical Center, which monitors Bangkok hospitals, said. One died.

“One boy who we understand was 12 years old has died from injuries sustained in the blast. Another child is undergoing an operation and a third child is still in the emergency room with us,” an emergency room nurse at Ramathibodi Hospital in central Bangkok, who declined to be identified, told Reuters.

Leaders of the pro-government United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) had vowed to “deal with” anti-government leader Suthep Thaugsuban, setting the scene for possible confrontation between pro- and anti-government groups.

“This fight will be harder than any other … You must think how we can deal with Suthep and those supporting him,” Jatuporn Prompan, a UDD leader and senior member of the ruling Puea Thai Party, told thousands of cheering supporters in Nakhon Ratchasima, northeast of the capital.

It was unclear whether Jatuporn was calling for an armed struggle, but he was speaking just hours after gunmen shot at an anti-government protest stage and threw explosive devices in the Khao Saming district of the eastern province of Trat, killing a five-year-old girl and wounding 41 people.

WEEKS OF PROTESTS

Anti-government protesters have blocked main Bangkok intersections for weeks with tents, tyres and sandbags, seeking to unseat Yingluck and halt the influence of her billionaire brother, Thaksin Shinawatra, an ousted former premier regarded by many as the real power behind the government.

The protests are the biggest since deadly political unrest in 2010, when Thaksin’s “red shirt” supporters paralysed Bangkok in an attempt to remove a government led by the Democrat Party, now the opposition.

More than 90 people were killed and 2,000 wounded when Suthep, at the time a deputy prime minister, sent in troops.

Presenting a further headache for Yingluck, Thailand’s anti-corruption body filed charges against her last week over a rice subsidy scheme that has left hundreds of farmers, her natural backers, unpaid.

Yingluck is due to hear the charges on Thursday.

The UDD, largely made up of Thaksin supporters based in the populous north and northeast, was formed in 2008 as a counter-force to the yellow-shirted anti-Thaksin People’s Alliance for Democracy group.

Thanawut Wichaidit, a spokesman for the UDD, said a strategy to counter anti-government protests in Bangkok had yet to be worked out, but that the movement wanted to avoid civil war.

“We want to fight peacefully, without weapons, but we have not yet decided how we will proceed and that is why we are meeting today to come up with a plan” Thanawut told Reuters.

“The thing we are trying to avoid at all costs is a civil war and any kind of confrontation.”

The protests are the latest chapter in a political conflict that has gripped Thailand for eight years and broadly pits Bangkok’s middle class and elite, and followers in the south, against rural backers of Yingluck and her brother.

UDD chairwoman Thida Tawornseth said Sunday’s rally would consolidate plans to restore democracy after the opposition boycotted and disrupted elections this month, leaving the country under a caretaker government. On Saturday, she ruled out any plans for violence.

Four protesters and a police officer were killed on Tuesday when police attempted to reclaim protest sites near government buildings. Six people were wounded by a grenade on Friday.

Spain will start their campaign for a third successive European title in a group with Ukraine, Slovakia, Belarus, Macedonia and Luxembourg following the draw for the Euro 2016 qualifying competition made on Sunday.

Italy, runners-up to Spain in 2012, will meet Croatia, Norway, Bulgaria, Azerbaijan and Malta in their section.

Gibraltar, UEFA’s newest association, will face Germany, Ireland, Poland, Scotland and Georgia. They were originally drawn in the same group as Spain but moved to another one because of political tensions between the two countries.

The nine group winners and runners-up will qualify automatically for the finals, along with the best third-placed team. The eight other third-placed teams will meet in playoffs to decide the final four teams to take part in the finals in France in 2016.

The qualifying competition, which lasts for 13 months, begins in September.

EURO 2016 qualifying draw

GROUP A
Netherlands
Czech Republic
Turkey
Latvia
Iceland
Kazakhstan

GROUP B
Bosnia-Herzegovina
Belgium
Israel
Wales
Cyprus
Andorra

GROUP C
Spain
Ukraine
Slovakia
Belarus
Macedonia
Luxembourg

GROUP D
Germany
Ireland
Poland
Scotland
Georgia
Gibraltar

GROUP E
England
Switzerland
Slovenia
Estonia
Lithuania
San Marino

GROUP F
Greece
Hungary
Romania
Finland
Northern Ireland
Faroe Islands

GROUP G
Russia
Sweden
Austria
Montenegro
Moldova
Liechtenstein

GROUP H
Italy
Croatia
Norway
Bulgaria
Azerbaijan
Malta

GROUP I
Portugal
Denmark
Serbia
Armenia
Albania

Western nations face a daunting task to help stabilise a near bankrupt Ukraine after a popular uprising toppled its Russian-backed president, and will need to placate a wounded Moscow.

The biggest challenge falls to the European Union, which helped broker an end to violent repression in Kiev last week, after Ukrainians rebelled against President Viktor Yanukovich.

The EU now faces the pottery shop rule: you break it, you own it. Yet it is far from clear that west European members want to take ownership of rescuing the sprawling former Soviet republic of 46 million people.

The European Commission’s economics chief, Olli Rehn, promised substantial financial support on Sunday and went out on a political limb by saying the country should be given the prospect of joining the EU one day.

“From a European point of view it is important that we provide a clear European perspective for the Ukrainian people who have shown their commitment to European values,” Rehn said after a meeting of the world’s financial leaders in Sydney.

“European perspective” is EU-speak for a membership prospect. Not all of the 28 member states support that view.

Rehn made clear that Brussels stood ready to provide more than the 610 million euros ($838 million) in immediate assistance that was on offer last November when Yanukovich spurned a far-reaching economic pact with the EU, preferring Vladimir Putin’s promise of a $15 billion bailout from Russia.

The International Monetary Fund also said it was ready to assist a new Ukrainian government if Kiev were to request help, but IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said “important economic reforms” which Yanukovich rejected would still be a condition for a loan package.

These include removing gas subsidies that benefit Ukraine’s business oligarchs but also the poor, and raising sales tax.

“We obviously hope the situation settles … we will be ready to engage, ready to help,” Lagarde said in Sydney.

As for Washington, officials said on Friday before Yanukovich fled that a unity government in Kiev would have its “strong support” in seeking an IMF-backed programme to stabilize the economy. There was no mention of bilateral U.S. help.

IMF insiders say the Fund would be wary of lending to an interim Ukrainian government given the country’s history of weak economic reforms.

FRONT-LOADING

EU officials have said that by front-loading amounts planned over a seven-year period under the proposed association agreement, Kiev could receive more than 2 billion euros quickly once a deal was signed.

The EU could also bring forward access to its own market of 500 million consumers before full ratification, but Ukraine doesn’t have much to sell.

All that would require a Ukrainian government empowered to sign the deal, which would probably have to wait until after a presidential election now set for May 25.

Some experts such as Michael Leigh, a former top civil servant in the European Commission’s enlargement department, say the agreement was flawed and should be rewritten to offer more incentives and pose fewer demands in terms of Ukraine adopting swathes of EU legislation and standards.

Economists say implementing the proposed Deep and Comprehensive Trade Area could further weaken the Ukrainian economy initially, hitting uncompetitive industries that have sold most of their output to Russia.

There are also big political risks, with the release of jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko raising the prospect of bitter rivalry for power in Kiev.

EU officials recall her period as prime minister after Ukraine’s 2004/5 pro-democracy Orange Revolution as hardly less corrupt than Yanukovich’s tenure. Ukraine is 144th on watchdog Transparency International’s index of perceived corruption.

“Political uncertainty has arguably increased – including around the outcome of the presidential election set for 25 May – bringing with it a potential increase in the probability of a sovereign default,” Nomura political analyst Alastair Newton said.

BREAK-UP RISK

One immediate concern is to ensure Ukraine holds together and the mostly Russian-speaking industrial east and Black Sea coast does not break away.

“The territorial integrity of Ukraine is fundamental. It is guaranteed by Russia and all other European countries,” Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt said on his Twitter account.

The risk appeared to ease on Saturday, when pro-Yanukovich officials, meeting in the eastern city of Kharkiv, rejected any idea of a split. Some of them subsequently fled to Russia as supporters of the uprising demonstrated in some eastern towns.

Russia, the clear loser of the latest round of this geopolitical tug of war, has a major naval base at Sebastopol in the Ukrainian province of Crimea. It could also tip Ukraine into default by calling in the billions Kiev owes Moscow and its gas monopoly Gazprom.

In previous crises, it has cut off gas supplies to Ukraine, severely reducing flows to central and west European countries that rely on pipelines running through the country. But energy experts say Gazprom is in a weaker position now.

EU officials fear Putin may also retaliate by cutting trade and energy supplies and revive frozen territorial conflicts in two other ex-Soviet republics that have signed agreements with the bloc – Moldova and Georgia.

U.S. President Barack Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have been working the telephones to Putin to try to persuade Moscow to accept a peaceful transition in Ukraine. The Kremlin has alternated between silence and comments disputing the legitimacy of Yanukovich’s ouster.

The White House said on Friday that Putin had agreed that U.S. and Russian envoys would go together to Kiev to help ensure a smooth implementation of a transition agreement signed by Yanukovich and opposition leaders.

But that was before Yanukovich was deposed.

“If there’s an economic package it will be important that Russia doesn’t do anything to undermine that economic package and is working in cooperation and support of it,” British Foreign Secretary William Hague told BBC TV.

Asked if he was worried that Russia might send in tanks to defend the interests of Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine, Hague warned against “external duress” or Russian intervention.

Moscow is holding back the second $2 billion tranche of its promised $15 billion bailout until the situation in Ukraine clarifies, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said in Sydney.

ENLARGEMENT FATIGUE

Whether the dramatic events in Kiev will soften any hearts in western Europe towards offering Ukraine a membership prospect remains to be seen.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, whose country played a central role in the negotiations, highlighted the stakes for the EU in a country that borders his own.

“We are dealing in Ukraine with the first sacrifices of life for the integration of Europe. Today it is tragic, but in the future this will be a true hope for Ukraine,” he said on Friday.

Yet much of western Europe is suffering enlargement fatigue after the bloc admitted 13 new mostly ex-communist central and east European members since 2004.

EU co-founder France, in particular, would rather keep Ukraine and Turkey, which has been negotiating for accession in slow motion since 2005, in an outer ring of partners outside the bloc. Germany’s Merkel is also cool.

The EU has found it politically difficult enough to bail out its own members during the bloc’s debt crisis. Spending big on an outsider, albeit on its border, will be more fraught still.

By Gwynne Dyer

FROM a Ukrainian point of view, the priority is not to throw their revolution away again like they did after the Orange Revolution ten years ago. But from everybody else’s point of view, the priority now is to avoid an irreparable breach between Russia and the West. One Cold War was enough.

The Yanukovych era is finished; the former president will not make another come-back. He has killed too many people, and the vulgar ostentation of his former palace (whose architect understandably chose to remain anonymous) has shocked Ukrainians even though they already knew he was deeply corrupt. Besides, Russia will not bet on this horse again.

On the other hand, the various opposition leaders will have great difficulty in deciding who leads their coalition, if indeed they can even agree on a coalition before the promised election on 25 May. But they’ll still win the election, because Yanukovych never allowed any plausible rivals to emerge in his pro-Russian Party of the Regions, and Russia will not be able to find and groom a suitable replacement in time.

This will frustrate people in the Russian-speaking east and south of the country, who did not take part in this revolution and do not share the desire of the Ukrainian-speaking half for closer ties with the European Union. They worry that free trade with the EU will threaten their jobs, and it will require much tact to reassure them that their interests will be protected. But they will not split the country: very few Ukrainians want to be part of Russia.

Who will emerge as Ukraine’s next leader? Yulia Tymoshenko, newly released from prison, is the obvious choice, and that would certainly ease matters on the Russian front. She got along reasonably well with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, when she was prime minister last time. But many Ukrainians who backed the revolution don’t trust her.

Tymoshenko is dogged by questions about how she got so rich after the Soviet Union collapsed, and she bears some of the blame for the chronic in-fighting that discredited Ukraine’s first attempt at running a democratic government after the Orange Revolution of 2004. None of the other potential candidates, however, is acceptable to Putin.

Then there is the wild card: what if Yanukovych goes on trial for ordering the killings, and the prosecutors get their hands on his secret communications with Putin? It would not serve justice well, but it would be better if Yanukovych and his leading henchmen make it safely into exile, having first destroyed all evidence of criminal acts that would implicate the Russian government.

The best that can be hoped for in the short run, therefore, is a cold peace between Kiev and Moscow, which means that the $15bn Putin promised to lend Yanukovych’s regime will not now be forthcoming. But the money has to come from somewhere, and the only alternative is the West, probably in the shape of the International Monetary Fund.

It is not clear if the United States and the EU are willing to come up with that kind of money. If not, then the upheavals in Ukraine will resume in fairly short order. And in either case Putin will work to sabotage the attempt to entrench a strong democratic system with effective anti-corruption laws in Ukraine.

President Barack Obama can tell Putin that Ukraine is not a square on a Cold War chessboard, but the Russian president does see it as a zero-sum game, and in terms of his own purposes he is right. His pet project to restore the Soviet Union in a non-Communist version by creating a “Eurasian Union”, for example, dwindles to nothing but Russia and a bunch of Central Asian dictatorships if Ukraine isn’t a part of it.

More importantly, Putin does not want to have a large, prosperous and democratic country with strong EU ties on Russia’s own border. Especially if it is another Slavic country that also used to be part of the Soviet Union, and it got its democracy as the result of a largely non-violent revolution carried out in the main square of the capital city. The example would be very dangerous to his regime.

There’s no risk of that sort of thing happening on Red Square in Moscow at the moment, but Putin thinks long term. Russia will therefore continue to meddle in Ukraine in an attempt to abort such a dangerous outcome

Confronting Moscow directly over this sort of thing would be a mistake, and could lead us all down the path that ends in a new Cold War. Russians, for historical reasons, do not see themselves as “outsiders” in Ukraine (although most Ukrainians do), and they will react very badly to attempts to exclude them entirely.

The better and safer path is to support the Ukrainians with trade and aid, but leave it to them to deal with Russian interference in their politics. They are perfectly capable of doing this for themselves, and they can also prosper without joining either the European Union or NATO. But they do need a whopping great loan, right now.

By Brian Michael Jenkins

Faced with open defiance from the leader of Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria and Iraq, Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri publicly expelled the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), suspending its franchise and stripping it of its status as part of the Al Qaeda global enterprise. The split will test the value of Al Qaeda’s brand.

Although Al Qaeda’s leaders have quarreled in the past over strategy, tactics, and targets, an open break like this is unprecedented and creates real risks for the leadership of both organizations. So, what’s next?

The rebellious ISIL is not likely to dissolve itself, and ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi – who has already rejected Zawahiri’s orders, claiming that he obeys only God – seems unlikely to back down. Now that Al Qaeda has declared ISIL a renegade, however, its leaders cannot allow ISIL to succeed in creating a rival center of power. That sets up a showdown that could turn an internal dispute into a schism that cuts across the jihadist universe.

Al Qaeda’s leaders place great importance on maintaining unity. In their view, disunity is the cause of Islam’s weakness. It prevented a strong response to the Crusades, and allowed external foes to conquer and occupy Muslim territory piecemeal. Al Qaeda’s recent expansion, combined with a diminishing central role and the ever-present danger of centrifugal forces, could dissipate the unity necessary to sustain its current global effort.

Al Qaeda’s central leadership has a history of trouble with autonomy-minded jihadists in Iraq. The current troubles began when ISIL asserted its authority over Jabhat al-Nusra, Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria. Al-Nusra rejected ISIL’s claim and was backed up by Al Qaeda’s central leadership, which instructed ISIL to confine its operations to Iraq. ISIL ignored the order.

Around the same time, ISIL signaled its broader ambitions by changing its name from the “Islamic State of Iraq” to the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.” “The Levant,” or “Al Sham,” historically refers to Greater Syria, and includes Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and, of course, Israel.

A further issue of contention is ISIL’s increasingly ferocious application of unlimited violence, often against Muslim civilians. The scent of blood has attracted a number of fighters to ISIL, many of them foreign volunteers who have come to Syria solely to kill. Al Qaeda fears that the indiscriminate slaughter of fellow Muslims will alienate supporters. Al Qaeda’s central leadership quarreled about the same issue with Baghdadi’s predecessor in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who proudly called himself the “prince of slaughter.”

This kind of tension seems built into terrorist groups. Ideologues resort to terrorist tactics to achieve their goals, but their campaigns attract harder men for whom violence seems an end in itself. They reject any self-imposed constraints as faint-hearted. If things are not going well, it is because the violence is insufficient. If things are going well, more violence will accelerate progress.

Al Qaeda’s attempts to mediate the dispute failed. Meanwhile, growing friction between ISIL and other rebel organizations in Syria erupted into open fighting, and ISIL demonstrated its growing power in the region by seizing control of Fallujah and Ramadi in Iraq.

Could this split have happened under Osama bin Laden? Zawahiri, his longtime lieutenant, has managed to stay in charge of the disparate Al Qaeda enterprise, but he did not inherit bin Laden’s moral authority, and has been viewed less as Al Qaeda’s commander, and more as its ideological commissar. The expulsion of ISIL will test his supremacy.

Although ISIL reportedly does not depend on Al Qaeda for its core needs, Baghdadi must worry about his own survival. Now that he is no longer Al Qaeda’s man, his own lieutenants may feel free to challenge his leadership.

It is not clear how important Al Qaeda’s imprimatur is to ISIL’s estimated 10,000 fighters. The foreign fighters responsible for some of the worst atrocities may not care. That said, the split will undoubtedly cause confusion among Al Qaeda’s supporters worldwide.

Overall, divisions in Al Qaeda’s ranks are good news for the United States. While the split will not end the jihadists’ terrorist campaigns, it will preoccupy Al Qaeda’s leaders and create uncertainty in its ranks. It may also open up some opportunities for the United States to facilitate discord, although caution is in order. Obvious attempts to fan the flames could backfire and reunify the movement.

Brian Michael Jenkins is senior adviser to the president of the RAND Corporation, and is the author of Al Qaeda in Its Third Decade: Irreversible Decline or Imminent Victory? and The Dynamics of Syria’s Civil War.

This article first appeared in www.themarknews.com

THE VIOLENT and thuggish behaviour outside the House of Representatives by Electricity Authority workers was shocking. Behaving like football hooligans on the rampage, demonstrators hurled firecrackers and stones at police – some fought with officers and entered the legislature – shouted abuse at deputies and the finance minister, prevented the Attorney-General from entering and, to cap it all, cut the power supply to the building.

These despicable terror tactics will take a different form today, as the striking EAC workers will subject the whole country to power cuts because the reduced output of the power stations will not be adequate to cover the country’s needs. Everyone will have to suffer, at significant cost to the economy, because the overpaid and under-worked, highly privileged employees of the EAC do not want the Authority privatised. And the only reason they are opposed to privatisation is because they fear they would lose their super-privileges.

But what do the workers propose we do? The passing of the privatisation bill is a condition for the release of the next instalment of financial assistance by our international lenders, without which the state would be unable to meet its financial obligations. Should the state default on its payments and declare bankruptcy so that it satisfies the selfish bullies and the EAC can carry on operating as a workers’ co-operative? It is not even as if the Authority is a financially robust concern – it is now a loss-making national liability and not a source of public wealth as unions and political parties have been claiming.

Unfortunately, most of the political parties, with their strident opposition to privatisation, have been encouraging the hooligan behaviour of the SGO unions. There was grudging condemnation of yesterday’s violence by some, but until early, yesterday evening Akel had avoided taking a stand, against the episodes. Even the parties which condemned the vandalism, made sure to tell us they respected the rights of unions to protest as if this was the issue. There was really no need to say this because our society has always respected the right of unions not only to protest, but also the dubious right to resort to bullying, blackmail and violence.

At least this time nobody accused the police of using ‘excessive’ force against the hooligans, as is the normal practice. On the contrary, Disy chief Averof Neophytou accused the police of not responding adequately to the thuggish behaviour in order to maintain law and order, a view also expressed by the government spokesman. The spokesman also said that President Anastasiades had asked for the enforcement of the letter of the law regarding strikes at essential services, which would be violated by the EAC strike.

The government must take a hard line because if it does not, the bullying unions will exploit any show of weakness and step up their terror tactics.

By Constantinos Psillides

THE FINANCE ministry will amend the proposed plan to privatise semi-governmental organisations to include suggestions made by the House finance committee, said Finance Minister Harris Georgiades on Monday, stressing that accepting the plan is the only way forward.

The committee was to discuss the privatisation plan on Monday but the meeting was interrupted by rowdy protesters outside the House.

The committee will re-convene this morning to continue discussion so that it can reach a majority consensus ahead of a House plenum vote due on Thursday.

The plan aims at the privatisation of telecommunications company CyTA, electricity authority EAC and the Ports authority.

The amended plan tries to pacify workers’ concerns over their financial future, by adding a clause saying that privatisation of each public company will only go through after a negotiation with a joint committee takes place. The committee consists of the finance minister, at least three other ministers as well as representatives from the workers union of the SGO in question.

Governing party DISY is expected to throw its full support behind the proposed plan. Coalition party DIKO, who up to now were supporting the privatisation plan in spite of heavy criticism within the party, is also expected to support the plan but recent developments may disturb the fragile alliance. DIKO executive office decided on Friday to dissolve the coalition, due to disagreement with the way President Nicos Anastasiades is handling the Cyprus problem.

DISY, with its 20 MPs, DIKO with 9 MPs and EVROKO with 1 MP have the majority needed (30-26) to make sure the plan will be voted by the plenum. The rest of the parliament parties, AKEL (19), EDEK (5), Citizen’s Alliance (1) and the Green Party (1) all publicly declared that they will be voting against the proposed plan.

Speaking after the end of Monday’s meeting, committee chairman and leader of DIKO Nicolas Papadopoulos expressed his satisfaction that the finance minister will amend the privatisation plan based on the suggestions made by the committee.

Attorney General Costas Clerides was supposed to appear before the committee to provide with expert opinion on whether the proposed plan violates constitutional law, but the protests prevented him from attending.

Privatising the SGOs is a commitment made by the government to the troika of lenders (International Monetary Fund, European Central Bank, European Union).

The troika’s latest review was very favourable for Cyprus but noted that the privatisations still weren’t decided, stressing that this is an essential part of the agreement. Troika technocrats included in their report that steps towards privatisations were to be taken before the next Eurogroup was in session, which is next week.

Olympiakos Piraeus coach Michel believes Manchester United could wilt under the pressure of playing for their last shot at a trophy this season when the teams meet in their Champions League last 16 first leg on Tuesday.

Despite winning their group and showing consistent form in Europe’s elite competition, United are out of the Premier League title race and both domestic cups.

“Their Premier League situation could be an incentive to them or it could be a burden on their shoulders, we know there’s lots at stake for Manchester United in this match,” Spaniard Michel told reporters on Monday.

“United cannot afford any mistakes tomorrow given their position in the Premier League.”

Despite being without main forward Javier Saviola after the former Argentina man picked up a leg injury in Saturday’s 4-0 Greek Super League win at OFI Crete, Michel is optimistic the hosts can make history by beating United for the first time.

“We are delighted to be at this stage of the competition. It’s a big prize for us so we won’t give anything away and we have great expectations,” the 50-year-old said.

“Of course experience counts but I think it’s actually an advantage that a lot of our players don’t have experience at this level. The passion we have displayed to get here will guide us and with all due respect we can create problems for United.”

Saviola’s absence means 21-year-old Nigerian striker Michael Olaitan, who has scored eight times in 15 appearances this season, is likely to start up front with Argentine attacking midfielder Alejandro Dominguez playing just behind.

United boss David Moyes is banking on the form of his fit-again strikers Robin van Persie and Wayne Rooney, who come into the match having both scored in Saturday’s 2-0 win at Crystal Palace.

Rooney also boosted United by pledging his long-term future to the club last week, signing until June 2019 before scoring a superb goal against Palace.

“I think both Rooney and Van Persie are back in really good shape and they’re scoring goals, and in the big games we can do far better when they are with us,” said Moyes.

“To win the group has given us an added edge, but we still have to play well to qualify. We have an opportunity to try and win a competition, if possible, but we first have to get through this tie.”

For his part, Rooney revealed that he would love nothing more than to celebrate his new contract by claiming a second Champions League winner’s medal.

“One is never enough, especially at this club,” he said, referring to their 2008 triumph.

“The feeling you get when you win it is incredible, so there is no way that you want to stop.”

Rooney added: “I want to be remembered as a winner. That’s what we aim to do – win trophies – so that’s what you’ll be judged on when you finish your career. That’s not just me – that’s the whole team.”

The ex-wife of Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev, detained in Cyprus on Monday in connection with the alleged theft of a diamond ring believed to be worth $25 million, has been released, police said.

Elena Rybolovleva had been arrested at 1.50pm at Larnaca International Airport upon her arrival from Switzerland but by 9pm police had concluded their questioning and allowed her to leave.

The case was reported to Limassol CID on Monday morning by a lawyer from Bolton Trustees who filed the complaint on behalf of the Domus Trust, a Cypriot International Trust.

Dmitry Rybolovlev, who used to hold close to 10 per cent in Bank of Cyprus (BoC) before the island’s bailout, made much of his fortune from the 2010 sale of his stake in fertiliser company Uralkali for $6.5 billion.

It is estimated that he has been left with one-twentieth of his total stake.

Rybolovlev’s Limassol-based lawyer in Cyprus, Andreas Neocleous told the Cyprus Mail on Monday, the issue with the ring had nothing to do with his client and declined to comment further.