Erdogan calls for two-state solution for Cyprus

[NewYorkExpress]

https://www.politico.eu/article/erdogan-calls-for-two-state-solution-for-cyprus/

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan called for a “two-state” solution in Cyprus during a high-profile visit to the Turkish-Cypriot north of the island on Sunday.

“There are two separate peoples, two separate democratic systems and two separate states in Cyprus today,” Erdoğan said in a speech.

Cyprus has been divided into a Turkish Cypriot north and a Greek Cypriot south since Turkey’s 1974 invasion, which came in response to a Greece-backed coup. Ankara does not recognize the Republic of Cyprus, an EU member state that is otherwise recognized internationally as the sole sovereign authority over the whole island.



Several attempts to find a compromise settlement over the years have failed and Turkey, Greece and Cyprus are at odds over potential offshore gas and oil reserves.

Erdoğan visited the island to celebrate 37 years since the unilateral declaration of independence of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.

The visit came weeks after Ersin Tatar was elected president of Northern Cyprus. His victory is expected to cede even more control of Northern Cyprus’ internal affairs to Ankara and hamper efforts to solve the Cyprus dispute.

[StateBoiler]

I've always thought that was the end-state or it just becomes a province of Turkey (with that probably not very likely). I'm a de facto guy in geopolitics, so de facto it is two states now.

It's one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the EU was admitting Cyprus into the union without this issue resolved. They removed any impetus from the Greek side to compromise to anything, as shown by the result of the UN referendum, as well as dooming any EU-Turkey negotiations on any topic, which helped lead to the likes of Erdogan coming into power.

[CumbrianLefty]

I've always thought that was the end-state or it just becomes a province of Turkey (with that probably not very likely). I'm a de facto guy in geopolitics, so de facto it is two states now.

It's one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the EU was admitting Cyprus into the union without this issue resolved. They removed any impetus from the Greek side to compromise to anything, as shown by the result of the UN referendum, as well as dooming any EU-Turkey negotiations on any topic, which helped lead to the likes of Erdogan coming into power.

An absolute stinker, that one.

[Omega21]

I've always thought that was the end-state or it just becomes a province of Turkey (with that probably not very likely). I'm a de facto guy in geopolitics, so de facto it is two states now.

It's one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the EU was admitting Cyprus into the union without this issue resolved. They removed any impetus from the Greek side to compromise to anything, as shown by the result of the UN referendum, as well as dooming any EU-Turkey negotiations on any topic, which helped lead to the likes of Erdogan coming into power.

And why would anyone want Turkey in the EU?

Europe begins in Greece, and their only blunder is not sending the military to stop an unlawful invasion of a sovereign state's territory.

[Zinneke]

I've always thought that was the end-state or it just becomes a province of Turkey (with that probably not very likely). I'm a de facto guy in geopolitics, so de facto it is two states now.

It's one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the EU was admitting Cyprus into the union without this issue resolved. They removed any impetus from the Greek side to compromise to anything, as shown by the result of the UN referendum, as well as dooming any EU-Turkey negotiations on any topic, which helped lead to the likes of Erdogan coming into power.

And why would anyone want Turkey in the EU?

Europe begins in Greece, and their only blunder is not sending the military to stop an unlawful invasion of a sovereign state's territory.

Easy question to answer...Eurosceptic Brits that you probably like to glorify initially had it as a policy so that the EU would remain just a loose trade deal rather than a political union.

[Omega21]

I've always thought that was the end-state or it just becomes a province of Turkey (with that probably not very likely). I'm a de facto guy in geopolitics, so de facto it is two states now.

It's one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the EU was admitting Cyprus into the union without this issue resolved. They removed any impetus from the Greek side to compromise to anything, as shown by the result of the UN referendum, as well as dooming any EU-Turkey negotiations on any topic, which helped lead to the likes of Erdogan coming into power.

And why would anyone want Turkey in the EU?

Europe begins in Greece, and their only blunder is not sending the military to stop an unlawful invasion of a sovereign state's territory.

Easy question to answer...Eurosceptic Brits that you probably like to glorify initially had it as a policy so that the EU would remain just a loose trade deal rather than a political union.

Glorify?

I'm just glad they are out. The EU does not need an EU member in which the majority of the population oppose it.

Even if the margins switched to something like 52-48 Remain, they're just a flip-flopping liability that goes through more phases and swings than a 15-year-old teenager.

I'm a strong supporter of a strong EU, although I do want more direct-democracy and more direct control given to the people across the bloc.

[StateBoiler]

I've always thought that was the end-state or it just becomes a province of Turkey (with that probably not very likely). I'm a de facto guy in geopolitics, so de facto it is two states now.

It's one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the EU was admitting Cyprus into the union without this issue resolved. They removed any impetus from the Greek side to compromise to anything, as shown by the result of the UN referendum, as well as dooming any EU-Turkey negotiations on any topic, which helped lead to the likes of Erdogan coming into power.

And why would anyone want Turkey in the EU?

Europe begins in Greece, and their only blunder is not sending the military to stop an unlawful invasion of a sovereign state's territory.

I didn’t say Turkey in the EU, I said Turkey-EU negotiations on any topic. Cyprus can veto anything, so it weakened pro-European politicians in Turkey and strengthened their opponents, which helped lead Erdogan coming to power. Meanwhile the Cypriots play the Russian money laundering lapdog in EU proceedings.

[President Johnson]

Turkey is occupying half of the Cyprus Island since 1974 against international law. If the people of Cyprus decide to have a two state solution in a fair public referendum, they should get that. Otherwise, Erdogan should be pay a price for violating international law.

[StateBoiler]

Turkey is occupying half of the Cyprus Island since 1974 against international law. If the people of Cyprus decide to have a two state solution in a fair public referendum, they should get that. Otherwise, Erdogan should be pay a price for violating international law.

If you go against international law for 46 years and nothing is done in the medium, is it really law? Again, I'm a de facto guy.

(Can someone explain to me why the actions of the Greek military junta in 1974 made the Greeks here the good guys?)

[Wikipedia delenda est]

Turkey is occupying half of the Cyprus Island since 1974 against international law. If the people of Cyprus decide to have a two state solution in a fair public referendum, they should get that. Otherwise, Erdogan should be pay a price for violating international law.

True, but the last time there was a realistic chance to reunite the island with the Annan Plan it was the Greek Cypriots who rejected it.

[Omega21]

Turkey is occupying half of the Cyprus Island since 1974 against international law. If the people of Cyprus decide to have a two state solution in a fair public referendum, they should get that. Otherwise, Erdogan should be pay a price for violating international law.

True, but the last time there was a realistic chance to reunite the island with the Annan Plan it was the Greek Cypriots who rejected it.

Turn Cyprus into a dysfunctional federation like Belgium? Yeah, great idea.

Better for the Cypriots to keep their 2x richer part and not let the illegal settlers become EU citizens. And yes, a very large part of the Turkish population was "resettled" from Turkey, basically ethnic engineering.

[CumbrianLefty]

Turkey is occupying half of the Cyprus Island since 1974 against international law. If the people of Cyprus decide to have a two state solution in a fair public referendum, they should get that. Otherwise, Erdogan should be pay a price for violating international law.

True, but the last time there was a realistic chance to reunite the island with the Annan Plan it was the Greek Cypriots who rejected it.

Yes, this cant be said too often - and I'm not really someone sympathetic to the Turkish side on this.

[Person Man]

When does this guy get whacked?

[CumbrianLefty]

Well, there's already been at least one failed attempt I think......

[thumb21]

(Can someone explain to me why the actions of the Greek military junta in 1974 made the Greeks here the good guys?)

People tend to forget this because the narrative around Cyprus is always written as 'the Greeks' vs 'the Turks', as if there weren't differences and factions within each group. Greek Cypriots were victims of the 1974 coup also, it was the overthrowing of the government elected by Greek Cypriots by the Greek junta from Athens. We can talk about the awful things that happened before the 1974 crisis, Greeks treated Turks badly then and have never taken responsibility for it, but we are talking about what the situation is now. That phase of the conflict ended in 1974 and ever since, Turkey has been occupying Cyprus and has done what it can to solidify its foothold rather than acting in good faith to find a solution. Turkey had designs on Cyprus long before 1974, and the coup was their excuse to invade. After the war, they solidified the occupation by settling mainland Turks in Greek houses, making the return of refugees as part of a peace agreement impossible. By denying Greek Cypriots the prospect of returning to their homes, they removed the main incentive for Greeks to agree to re-unification.

[StateBoiler]

(Can someone explain to me why the actions of the Greek military junta in 1974 made the Greeks here the good guys?)

People tend to forget this because the narrative around Cyprus is always written as 'the Greeks' vs 'the Turks', as if there weren't differences and factions within each group. Greek Cypriots were victims of the 1974 coup also, it was the overthrowing of the government elected by Greek Cypriots by the Greek junta from Athens. We can talk about the awful things that happened before the 1974 crisis, Greeks treated Turks badly then and have never taken responsibility for it, but we are talking about what the situation is now. That phase of the conflict ended in 1974 and ever since, Turkey has been occupying Cyprus and has done what it can to solidify its foothold rather than acting in good faith to find a solution. Turkey had designs on Cyprus long before 1974, and the coup was their excuse to invade. After the war, they solidified the occupation by settling mainland Turks in Greek houses, making the return of refugees as part of a peace agreement impossible. By denying Greek Cypriots the prospect of returning to their homes, they removed the main incentive for Greeks to agree to re-unification.

A 10-year-old in 1974 is 56 years old now. Are we going to have to wait until everyone has died until we can come to a solution? The only way Greek Cypriots can return to the north and get their houses back with no compensation for people you just made homeless is a Greek Cypriot-led genocide of Turkish Cypriots. Did ethnic Germans in 1945 that ran from the Soviets in Eastern Europe ever get any compensation? I'm not saying the Turkish Cypriots were in the right in 1974, I just want an acknowledgement of reality as it has existed for 46 years. Or perhaps we have to wait until 2074 when 100 years' possession under old common law equaled right of ownership. (If it takes that long, complete failure of the international order.)

A lot of my problem with institutions like the UN as far as how it practices foreign affairs is their presence keeps longstanding conflicts from resolving. Western Sahara is another great example: why can't everyone just acknowledge the truth of the matter? Turkish Cyprus exists. Western Sahara is almost entirely Morocco's. Crimea is part of Russia. Do you disagree with that? Great, get off your ass Mr. Foreign Minister and go overturn it and make de jure a de facto reality. No one does that, so their statements on said matters are literally meaningless and we continue in these fantasylands that Taiwan, Abkhazia, Transnistria, and Artsakh don't exist and that Georgia and Cyprus are whole states when they're clearly not. These fantasylands meanwhile actively harm good Western-style democracies trying to achieve recognition like Somaliland when the International Community are like "yeah, sorry, we know you mean well, but we have to support the anarchic wasteland known as Somalia".

[thumb21]

(Can someone explain to me why the actions of the Greek military junta in 1974 made the Greeks here the good guys?)

People tend to forget this because the narrative around Cyprus is always written as 'the Greeks' vs 'the Turks', as if there weren't differences and factions within each group. Greek Cypriots were victims of the 1974 coup also, it was the overthrowing of the government elected by Greek Cypriots by the Greek junta from Athens. We can talk about the awful things that happened before the 1974 crisis, Greeks treated Turks badly then and have never taken responsibility for it, but we are talking about what the situation is now. That phase of the conflict ended in 1974 and ever since, Turkey has been occupying Cyprus and has done what it can to solidify its foothold rather than acting in good faith to find a solution. Turkey had designs on Cyprus long before 1974, and the coup was their excuse to invade. After the war, they solidified the occupation by settling mainland Turks in Greek houses, making the return of refugees as part of a peace agreement impossible. By denying Greek Cypriots the prospect of returning to their homes, they removed the main incentive for Greeks to agree to re-unification.

A 10-year-old in 1974 is 56 years old now. Are we going to have to wait until everyone has died until we can come to a solution? Or perhaps have to wait until 2074 when 100 years' possession under old common law equaled right of ownership. (If it takes that long, complete failure of the international order.)

To be frank, I don't know the answer. The situation was hard for everyone in Cyprus but nowadays there are two generations of people in Cyprus who didn't live or were too young to really remember Cyprus before 1974, and have adapted to the reality post-1974. I think you are right that in the end, North Cyprus will gain international recognition because there isn't a realistic alternative, but also don't expect Greek Cypriots to accept that fact easily.

[Lord Halifax]

(Can someone explain to me why the actions of the Greek military junta in 1974 made the Greeks here the good guys?)

People tend to forget this because the narrative around Cyprus is always written as 'the Greeks' vs 'the Turks', as if there weren't differences and factions within each group. Greek Cypriots were victims of the 1974 coup also, it was the overthrowing of the government elected by Greek Cypriots by the Greek junta from Athens. We can talk about the awful things that happened before the 1974 crisis, Greeks treated Turks badly then and have never taken responsibility for it, but we are talking about what the situation is now. That phase of the conflict ended in 1974 and ever since, Turkey has been occupying Cyprus and has done what it can to solidify its foothold rather than acting in good faith to find a solution. Turkey had designs on Cyprus long before 1974, and the coup was their excuse to invade. After the war, they solidified the occupation by settling mainland Turks in Greek houses, making the return of refugees as part of a peace agreement impossible. By denying Greek Cypriots the prospect of returning to their homes, they removed the main incentive for Greeks to agree to re-unification.

A 10-year-old in 1974 is 56 years old now. Are we going to have to wait until everyone has died until we can come to a solution? The only way Greek Cypriots can return to the north and get their houses back with no compensation for people you just made homeless is a Greek Cypriot-led genocide of Turkish Cypriots. Did ethnic Germans in 1945 that ran from the Soviets in Eastern Europe ever get any compensation? I'm not saying the Turkish Cypriots were in the right in 1974, I just want an acknowledgement of reality as it has existed for 46 years. Or perhaps we have to wait until 2074 when 100 years' possession under old common law equaled right of ownership. (If it takes that long, complete failure of the international order.)

A lot of my problem with institutions like the UN as far as how it practices foreign affairs is their presence keeps longstanding conflicts from resolving. Western Sahara is another great example: why can't everyone just acknowledge the truth of the matter? Turkish Cyprus exists. Western Sahara is almost entirely Morocco's. Crimea is part of Russia. Do you disagree with that? Great, get off your ass Mr. Foreign Minister and go overturn it and make de jure a de facto reality. No one does that, so their statements on said matters are literally meaningless and we continue in these fantasylands that Taiwan, Abkhazia, Transnistria, and Artsakh don't exist and that Georgia and Cyprus are whole states when they're clearly not. These fantasylands meanwhile actively harm good Western-style democracies trying to achieve recognition like Somaliland when the International Community are like "yeah, sorry, we know you mean well, but we have to support the anarchic wasteland known as Somalia".

Well, sometimes these conflicts do end with the occupying power withdrawing like in East Timor, and recognizing territorial gains by conquest will open up Pandora's Box. Transdnistr is likely the next to be reunited by force one Moldova reunites with Romania in a decade or so. Doubt Russia is prepared to go to war to defend such a useless outpost.

If Erdogan keeps pushing the limits he'll sooner or later be involved in a major regional war and lose it. The neo-Ottoman project is doomed. Egypt, France and Italy won't accept it - although it's ofc far more likely that he'll be stopped long before that, either by external pressure or losing power, or a combination of both.

The African governments descended from liberation movements (like the ANC or MPLA) aren't going to recognize Moroccan possession of Western Sahara regardless of what the UN does, there is a sort of "brotherhood of liberation movements" in Africa and they view it as a decolonization issue. The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a member of the AU, and while the AU has toned down its support for SADR (after Morocco rejoined the organization) they aren't going to kick them out. Western Sahara is far more of an internal African matter than a UN matter. It doesn't really matter what the UN thinks if Algeria, Nigeria and South Africa continue to support SADR's claims.

[StateBoiler]

(Can someone explain to me why the actions of the Greek military junta in 1974 made the Greeks here the good guys?)

People tend to forget this because the narrative around Cyprus is always written as 'the Greeks' vs 'the Turks', as if there weren't differences and factions within each group. Greek Cypriots were victims of the 1974 coup also, it was the overthrowing of the government elected by Greek Cypriots by the Greek junta from Athens. We can talk about the awful things that happened before the 1974 crisis, Greeks treated Turks badly then and have never taken responsibility for it, but we are talking about what the situation is now. That phase of the conflict ended in 1974 and ever since, Turkey has been occupying Cyprus and has done what it can to solidify its foothold rather than acting in good faith to find a solution. Turkey had designs on Cyprus long before 1974, and the coup was their excuse to invade. After the war, they solidified the occupation by settling mainland Turks in Greek houses, making the return of refugees as part of a peace agreement impossible. By denying Greek Cypriots the prospect of returning to their homes, they removed the main incentive for Greeks to agree to re-unification.

A 10-year-old in 1974 is 56 years old now. Are we going to have to wait until everyone has died until we can come to a solution? The only way Greek Cypriots can return to the north and get their houses back with no compensation for people you just made homeless is a Greek Cypriot-led genocide of Turkish Cypriots. Did ethnic Germans in 1945 that ran from the Soviets in Eastern Europe ever get any compensation? I'm not saying the Turkish Cypriots were in the right in 1974, I just want an acknowledgement of reality as it has existed for 46 years. Or perhaps we have to wait until 2074 when 100 years' possession under old common law equaled right of ownership. (If it takes that long, complete failure of the international order.)

A lot of my problem with institutions like the UN as far as how it practices foreign affairs is their presence keeps longstanding conflicts from resolving. Western Sahara is another great example: why can't everyone just acknowledge the truth of the matter? Turkish Cyprus exists. Western Sahara is almost entirely Morocco's. Crimea is part of Russia. Do you disagree with that? Great, get off your ass Mr. Foreign Minister and go overturn it and make de jure a de facto reality. No one does that, so their statements on said matters are literally meaningless and we continue in these fantasylands that Taiwan, Abkhazia, Transnistria, and Artsakh don't exist and that Georgia and Cyprus are whole states when they're clearly not. These fantasylands meanwhile actively harm good Western-style democracies trying to achieve recognition like Somaliland when the International Community are like "yeah, sorry, we know you mean well, but we have to support the anarchic wasteland known as Somalia".

Well, sometimes these conflicts do end with the occupying power withdrawing like in East Timor, and recognizing territorial gains by conquest will open up Pandora's Box. Transdnistr is likely the next to be reunited by force one Moldova reunites with Romania in a decade or so. Doubt Russia is prepared to go to war to defend such a useless outpost.

Transnistria has always been hopelessly indefensible. I agree. Moldovan unification with Romania though...eh, not sure about that occurring. Maybe about as likely as a greater Albania with Kosovo included.

If Erdogan keeps pushing the limits he'll sooner or later be involved in a major regional war and lose it. The neo-Ottoman project is doomed. Egypt, France and Italy won't accept it - although it's ofc far more likely that he'll be stopped long before that, either by external pressure or losing power, or a combination of both.

Who would he lose to? Whoever he loses to requires troops to be deployed, and the EU aren't deploying anything for eastern Europe or the Middle East unless something bizarre happened. The most I'd ever see them do is an eastern Mediterranean naval deployment to keep tensions down but no boots on the ground. Everyone else in the region I'd back the Turks in a heartbeat. So the Turks in that scenario just have to keep the Americans and Russians not involved.

The African governments descended from liberation movements (like the ANC or MPLA) aren't going to recognize Moroccan possession of Western Sahara regardless of what the UN does, there is a sort of "brotherhood of liberation movements" in Africa and they view it as a decolonization issue. The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a member of the AU, and while the AU has toned down its support for SADR (after Morocco rejoined the organization) they aren't going to kick them out. Western Sahara is far more of an internal African matter than a UN matter. It doesn't really matter what the UN thinks if Algeria, Nigeria and South Africa continue to support SADR's claims.

Doesn't change Moroccan possession of Western Sahara. There's been no African challenge to that status since Algeria and Mauritania failed at taking possession of it themselves.

[(no subject)]

The Greek Cypriots are fooling themselves, just like how the Americans foolishly think Cuba will just submit to them once the Castros are gone.

[WMS]

A lot of my problem with institutions like the UN as far as how it practices foreign affairs is their presence keeps longstanding conflicts from resolving. Western Sahara is another great example: why can't everyone just acknowledge the truth of the matter? Turkish Cyprus exists. Western Sahara is almost entirely Morocco's. Crimea is part of Russia. Do you disagree with that? Great, get off your ass Mr. Foreign Minister and go overturn it and make de jure a de facto reality. No one does that, so their statements on said matters are literally meaningless and we continue in these fantasylands that Taiwan, Abkhazia, Transnistria, and Artsakh don't exist and that Georgia and Cyprus are whole states when they're clearly not. These fantasylands meanwhile actively harm good Western-style democracies trying to achieve recognition like Somaliland when the International Community are like "yeah, sorry, we know you mean well, but we have to support the anarchic wasteland known as Somalia".

Why hello there Somaliland mention! I also noticed NOBODY responded to that...

As someone who on this very forum was carrying the flag for recognition of Somaliland, I am beyond astonished and disgusted with The International Community™️ for STILL not recognizing Somaliland 15 goddamn years later! What, they’re supposed to willingly join the badly glued-together puzzle pieces of Somalia? No wonder old conflicts are re-erupting; The International Community™️ never gets around to actually solving any of them - although they can certainly get in the way of solutions by sticking to outdated policies forever. At best they can stop the killing for a while, albeit not in Somalia and consequently their policies towards Somaliland are astonishingly stupid and counterproductive. But I said that 15 years ago too...