The idea encapsulated in the view that «a non-solution is the best solution» enjoys support on both sides of Cyprus’s Green Line, albeit for different reasons. The Greek Cypriots’ backing for a «non-solution» is nothing but an attempt to give substance to their profound despair, which has rightfully convinced them that any outside therapy will only cement the unfavorable precedent and defeat all hope of reclaiming the pre-1974 status quo. For their part, the Turkish Cypriots (as well as Turks) who favor a «non-solution» have every reason to believe that time will flow to their advantage, meaning that the number of Turkish settlers on the island will continue to grow, members of the Turkish-Cypriot minority will keep migrating to escape poverty and Rauf Denktash’s anti-democratic regime, and the chasm will deepen. What is certain is that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s plan for a solution cannot fully satisfy both sides, which are divided by much more than before 1974. (Those who «do not forget» are aware that at that time, for the international community the invaders were invaders, the occupation was occupation. Today, however, following numerous UN resolutions against the occupation and after three or four pro-Greek US presidents, the invaders have almost become natives and the occupation a legitimate establishment.) It’s also certain that in the intermediate period, Turkish and Turkish-Cypriot diplomacy (unaffected by the successive political changeovers) has proved more effective than that exercised by the Greeks and Greek Cypriots who wavered between the words «backing» and «coalition,» or reacted spasmodically as they failed to comprehend the reality that what they condemned as Turkish intransigence did not actually bother the international community. The Annan plan is no solution or cure. It merely is a confirmation that in 1974 Turkey won a war against Greece and Cyprus.