Summary
After Britain unilaterally annexed the island in 1914, Turkey recognized British sovereignty over the island in 1923 with the Treaty of Lausanne. Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots continued to live together. However, Greek Cypriots started to increase in population. Since 1931, Greek Cypriots intensified their demands for unification with Greece. Cyprus was wanted to be united with Greece and turned into a completely “Elen” island. Briefly speaking, the “ENOSIS” campaign was accelerated after the Second World War. First, Greece decided to take the Cyprus problem to the United Nations in 1954. Greece failed to achieve success in its various applications to the UN for “self-determination” between 1954 and 1958. Colonel Grivas from Greece founded the EOKA terrorist organization in 1955 and the acts of violence on the island gradually increased. As a result of these problems, Turkish Cypriots were forced to leave 33 mixed villages between 1955 and 1958. In this situation, the UK declared in 1956 that not only the Greek Cypriots but also the Turkish Cypriots had the right to “self-determination” and that the demand for partition was a valid option within this framework. Turkish Cypriots, who started their own organizational activities against Enosis, implemented the “partition” view in response to the developments. Turkey and Greece signed an agreement in Zurich on February 11, 1959, which was ratified by the UK and the leaders of the two communities in Cyprus in London. The Zurich and London Agreements were based on the principles of independence, partnership of the two communities, autonomy in the social sphere and effective guarantee of the solution by Turkey, Greece and the UK. The first negotiations between the two sides on the island started in 1968. These negotiations, in which the Turkish thesis was presented in the form of local autonomy, continued until the end of 1971. In the 1972-1974 period, the talks continued with the participation of experts from Turkey and Greece. These negotiations ended with the Greek/Greek coup of July 15, 1974. To summarize this situation, the Greek Cypriots, who reduced the participation of Turks in the administration to a lower proportion, advocated the legalization of the constitutional arrangements they had made in 1963, the further strengthening of the unitary state and the authority of local governments under the authority of the central government (Moran, 1998). In their 1970-1971 proposals, the Greeks made some adjustments. In these proposals, they accepted that Greeks and Turks would participate in 20 percent of the government. The Greeks did not object to the creation of separate electoral rolls and proposed that the Vice-President should be elected by the Turks, which they had wanted to abolish in their previous proposal. Nevertheless, local governments were to remain firmly under the control and authority of the central government.( Efegil E. and Olcay A.M.) With regard to legislation, the Greeks proposed a bicameral structure. The upper (federal) parliament would be elected through general elections and according to the population ratios of the communities. The lower (state) parliaments would be elected in general elections and according to separate electoral lists. The tasks of the lower (state) parliaments would be related to local governments and municipalities. The upper (federal) parliament was authorized to legislate on the functioning of the federal state. In the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee, they wanted the unilateral right of intervention granted to the guarantor states to be abolished and the Turkish Turks who migrated to the island to return to their countries. They proposed that the security of the island should be ensured by an international force to be established under the supervision of the United Nations (Stephen, 2000). From 1992 onwards, the Greeks started to prioritize the European Union dimension. In this way, they could win the European Union institutions to their side against Turkey, allow Greece to exert pressure indirectly, and further transform the problem into an international issue. In fact, the Cyprus problem could have been presented as a precondition for Turkey’s efforts for full membership, which would have meant forcing the Turkish side to make further concessions (Stavrinidcs, 1999).
Introduction
Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots have put forward their own theses in the Cyprus negotiation process. Turkish Cypriots, who were subjected to armed attacks by Greek Cypriot militia forces in 1964 and condemned to live on 3 percent of the island, advocate a state structure in which the sovereignty and self-determination rights are given to the two constituent partners, the federative / constituent states are more free / autonomous within themselves and the federal / central government is equipped with limited powers in order to prevent such incidents from happening again (Atakol, 2003). Turkish Cypriots stated that they wanted to live in areas under their own administration, with local autonomy. According to the Turks, who favored the restructuring of villages according to communal/ethnic criteria, two Local Authority Councils should be established and two separate Community Councils should be reconstituted. The Central Government, in contrast to the Greek proposal for full authority, would only be responsible for coordinating between the local authorities. From this date until the decision taken by the European Union at the Luxembourg Summit in 1997, Turkish Cypriots defended the loose federation thesis. According to this thesis, as we have tried to define above, a bi-zonal and bi-zonal loose federal state would be established and both communities would have the right to self-determination. In other words, there would be two separate Greek and Turkish administrations on the island and these administrations would have effective control over their own territories (Denktash, 1988; İsmail; Necatigil, 1993; Nedjatigil, 1982). We can divide the Cyprus negotiation process into 3 periods.
· Period 1974-1999: During this period, negotiations focused on redefining the political status of Cyprus and finding a bi-communal solution. During this period, there were several rounds of talks mediated by the UN Secretary-General, but no agreement was reached.
· Period 2000-2004: During this period, negotiations focused on Cyprus’ accession to the European Union (EU). While EU accession negotiations continued, negotiations on the political status of Cyprus also continued. During this period, bi-communal talks were held under the leadership of the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative and a draft agreement, known as the “Annan Plan”, was drafted. However, this plan was rejected by the Turkish Cypriots and the negotiations remained inconclusive.
· 2005-Present: During this period, negotiations continue to focus on the redefinition of the political status of Cyprus and the search for a bi-communal settlement. During this period, there were several rounds of talks mediated by the Special Representatives of the UN Secretary-General, but no agreement was reached. The Cyprus negotiations are talks on the political status of Cyprus and how to achieve a bi-communal settlement, which began in 1974 following the Cyprus Peace Operation and continue to this day. The negotiations are being conducted under the auspices of the United Nations (UN) and with the participation of the three guarantor states of Cyprus, Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom. History of Negotiations The Cyprus negotiations are talks on the political status of Cyprus and how to achieve a bi-communal settlement, which began in 1974 following the Cyprus Peace Operation and continue to this day. The negotiations are being conducted under the auspices of the United Nations (UN) and with the participation of the three guarantor states of Cyprus, Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom. Periods of Negotiations The Cyprus negotiations can be divided into three periods according to their historical development:
· Period 1974-1999: During this period, negotiations focused on redefining the political status of Cyprus and finding a bi-communal solution. During this period, there were several rounds of talks mediated by the UN Secretary-General, but no agreement was reached.
· Period 2000-2004: During this period, negotiations focused on Cyprus’ accession to the European Union (EU). While EU accession negotiations continued, negotiations on the political status of Cyprus also continued. During this period, bi-communal talks were held under the leadership of the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative and a draft agreement, known as the “Annan Plan”, was drafted. However, this plan was rejected by the Turkish Cypriots and the negotiations remained inconclusive.
· 2005-Present: During this period, negotiations continue to focus on the redefinition of the political status of Cyprus and the search for a bi-communal solution. During this period, there were several rounds of talks mediated by the Special Representatives of the UN Secretary-General, but no agreement was reached. Main Challenges of the Negotiations The main problems of the Cyprus negotiations are the following:
· The political status of Cyprus: On the political status of Cyprus, Turkish Cypriots favor a federal solution, while Greek Cypriots favor a united Cyprus.
· Equality and security for Turkish Cypriots: Turkish Cypriots want equal rights and guaranteed security in Cyprus.
· The territorial integrity of Cyprus: Greek Cypriots want the territorial integrity of Cyprus to be preserved. The EU sees the Cyprus negotiations as an opportunity to end the division of Cyprus and to unite the island in peace and prosperity. The EU provides political, economic and diplomatic support for the settlement of the Cyprus problem. The EU emphasizes the importance of both sides for the settlement of the Cyprus problem. It advocates a solution in which Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots have equal rights and security. The EU provides political, economic and diplomatic support for the settlement process. It states that it wants to see the efforts of the Cypriot leaders and emphasizes the increased political will of the guarantor states. If we look at the attitude of the Greek Cypriots in the Cyprus Negotiation process, they support the same ideas as the EU, they support the bi-communal settlement process. They expect Turkish Cypriots to respect the rights of Greek Cypriots and expect the EU to provide more support to the Cyprus Negotiations. The Greek Cypriot side sees the Cyprus negotiations as an opportunity to end the division of the island and reunify Cyprus as a single state. The Greek Cypriot side advocates a solution to the Cyprus problem based on a bicommunal federation. The Greek Cypriot side believes that a bi-communal solution is essential for the success of the Cyprus negotiations. The Greek Cypriot side believes that a settlement in which Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots enjoy equal rights and security is guaranteed will ensure peace and stability on the island. The Greek Cypriot side believes that Turkey has an important role to play in the settlement of the Cyprus problem. The Greek Cypriot side expects Turkey to make efforts to protect the rights of Greek Cypriots and to ensure the territorial integrity of Cyprus. The Greek Cypriot side is optimistic about the future of the Cyprus negotiations. The Greek Cypriot side believes that the political will of the Cypriot leaders and the guarantor states exists and that an agreement can be reached. The Greek Cypriot assessment of the Cyprus negotiations can be summarized as follows:
· The Greek Cypriot side sees the Cyprus negotiations as an opportunity to end the division of the island and reunify Cyprus as a single state.
· The Greek Cypriot side advocates a solution to the Cyprus problem based on a bi-communal federation.
· The Greek Cypriot side believes that a bi-communal solution is essential for the success of the Cyprus negotiations.
· The Greek Cypriot side believes that Turkey will also play an important role in the settlement of the Cyprus problem.
· The Greek Cypriot side is optimistic about the future of the Cyprus negotiations. The Greek Cypriot side’s expectations regarding the Cyprus negotiations are as follows:
· Turkish Cypriots begin to recognize the rights of Greek Cypriots.
· Greek Cypriots to take steps to address Turkish Cypriot security concerns.
· More EU support for the Cyprus negotiations. The main differences between the expectations of the Greek and Turkish sides regarding the Cyprus negotiations are as follows:
· The political status of Cyprus: The Greek Cypriot side advocates the unification of Cyprus as a single state, while the Turkish side advocates a federal solution.
· Equality and security of Turkish Cypriots: The Greek Cypriot side accepts that Turkish Cypriots have equal rights and their security is guaranteed, while the Turkish side argues that Turkish Cypriots have equal rights and their security must be guaranteed.
· The territorial integrity of Cyprus: The Greek Cypriot side argues that the territorial integrity of Cyprus must be preserved, while the Turkish side argues that the territorial integrity of Cyprus must be preserved, but the sovereignty of Turkish Cypriots must also be guaranteed. These differences are one of the main reasons why the Cyprus negotiations have so far remained inconclusive. The factors affecting Turkey’s position on the Cyprus negotiations are as follows:
· Turkish Cypriot security concerns.
· Protecting the territorial integrity of Cyprus.
· EU accession process for Cyprus.
· Turkey’s foreign policy. Turkey recognizes the difficulties facing the Cyprus negotiations. However, it remains committed to the settlement of the Cyprus problem and supports the continuation of the negotiations. Greece’s assessment of the Cyprus negotiations differs from Turkey’s in the following main respects:
· The political status of Cyprus: Greece advocates the unification of Cyprus as a single state, while Turkey advocates a federal solution.
· Equality and security of Turkish Cypriots: Greece recognizes that Turkish Cypriots have equal rights and their security is guaranteed, while Turkey argues that Turkish Cypriots have equal rights and their security must be guaranteed.
· The territorial integrity of Cyprus: Greece argues that the territorial integrity of Cyprus must be preserved, while Turkey argues that the territorial integrity of Cyprus must be preserved, but that the sovereignty of Turkish Cypriots must also be guaranteed. These differences are one of the main reasons why the Cyprus negotiations have so far remained inconclusive. During the settlement process, the UN is involved in the security of the island. They are located on the border of the Green Line. The UN has drawn it for both sides by dividing Nicosia into two parts in green color. It also acts as a mediator in the negotiation process. It has put forward many solutions, such as the Annan Plan, but they have not been resolved because the parties have their own interests at stake. The Annan Plan was the first time a solution was made to see what the people said, but the unification process did not take place because the Greeks only voted 35% “Yes”. The US is providing diplomatic support for this settlement process.
Reference
AKTAN S. (2020) How the fate of the island and Turkey was shaped before, during and after the Cyprus Operation /Euronews:July
ARSLAN M. (2020) The unresolved knot for 52 years: The Cyprus issue, AA News: October ATAKOL, Kenan, (2003). Turkish and Greek Cypriots: Is Their Separation Permanent, Ankara: METU Press, March 2003.
ERTEKÜN, Necati Münir (ed.), (1997). The Status of the Two Peoples in Cyprus: Legal Opinions, 2nd edition, Nicosia: TRNC Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Defense, 1997.
DENKTASH, R. R., (1988). The Cyprus Triangle, London: K. Rustem & Brother, 1988
MORAN, Michael, (1998). Sovereignty Divided: Essays on the International Dimensions of the Cyprus Problem, Nicosia: CYREP, 1998.
NECATIGIL, Zaim M., (1993). The Cyprus Question and the Turkish Position in International Law, second edition, New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. NEDJATIGIL, Zaim M., (1982). The Cyprus Contlict: A Lawyer’s View, second edition, Nicosia: A- Z Publications, 1982.
ÖKSÜZ F. Gürdallı F.(2018) The longest negotiation process in the history of diplomacy/ Kıbrıs Postası(June)
ÖZERSAY, Kudret, (2002). Cyprus Problem: A Legal Analysis, Ankara: Eurasian Center for Strategic Studies Publications, 2002.
STEPHEN, Michael, (2000). The Cyprus Question, London, January 2000. TAMKOÇ, Metin, (1988). The Turkish Cypriot State: The Embodiment of the Right of Self – determination, Nicosia: K. Rustem & Brother, 1988.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs\ Official website: https://www.mfa.gov.tr/kibris-meselesinin-tarihcesi_-bm-muzakerelerinin-baslangici.tr.mfa
STAVRINIDES, Zenon, (1999). The Cyprus Contlict: national identity and statehood, Lefkosa: Cyprus Research and Publishing Center, 1999.
