Skip to the Experiment part of the post; it's the most interesting.
First, on definitions
The Present - The Present does not refer to the way things are going, but to the way things are. It is a here and now judgment of a situation and circumstances surrounding it. A story focused on The Present is not concerned with how events led to the current situation nor where the current situation will lead, but defines the scenario that exists at the moment.
The Past - The Past is not unchanging. Often we learn new things that change our understanding of what past events truly meant and create new appreciations of how things really fit together. A story that focuses on The Past may be much more than a documentation of what happened. Frequently, it is a re-evaluation of the meaning of what has occurred that can lead to changing one's understanding of what is happening in the present or will eventually happen in the future.
The bold part of The Present is why I am so intrigued by your insistence that "still" means something ongoing and implies a present issue. The word "still" implies a history, a source that comes from before the current time. It is more than just "now". It is "now", but it is "now" with history.
The bold part in The Past looks very, very much like things in the present. And I wonder if you might be seeing that as the source of conflict and marking it as The Present. It seems that any time something bad happens, it is because of a re-evaluation of, or a new meaning is thought up for, something from the past.
Next, on story form connections
This story doesn't feel like Lord of the Flies, The Counterfeiters, Spirited Away, Antz, or Firefly (S1 Ep8). Each of those has an OS Concern of The Present. This story feels much more like Field of Dreams and if I had to find another description of something I haven't seen, I'd match it to a description of The Prestige or The Big Chill. Each of these has an OS Concern of The Past.
On contextual sub-genres
It seems your argument is for a Survival story, but that doesn't fit the first 1/4 of the book, at all. Existence or Status Quo, maybe (and that's a drawn out maybe), but not Survival. However, I have to ask: How in the world is this not a Wound story???
And now for the replies:
I find it rather paradoxical that you agree with the assessment here, and yet don't agree that it produces conflict driven from the Past. Varosha is a monument of the Past. Although, I'd be willing to try an experiment.
Get rid of Varosha; it no longer exists as part of the story... In fact, set it up so all the OS Greeks have been booted from their own, separate hometowns, unable to return for one reason or another. Make it more unbearable for them by ensuring they get only a single meal of bread and water a day. Have this be the driving force of dissension and frustration among everyone. (A guaranteed source of problems of The Present.) This would produce different storytelling, to be sure, but...
Is this the same argument as AitVC? I don't believe it is.
(Though, I'd like @lakis to answer this question for me. After all, it's his argument.)
Now, add one more thing: A keepsake for each OS Greek, some photo of home, or friends, or family, or some token or reminder of their previous lives in their previous hometowns. Have this drive their actions, their arguments, their conflict. (A guaranteed source from the Past)
Now, to me, that is the same argument as AitVC.
(Same question of whether this would work, @lakis.)