The European Union (EU) acted to solve the Cyprus question before the membership of the Southern Cyprus of Greek Administration (SCGA)’s entry to the EU as “The Republic of Cyprus”. With the efforts of the EU and the UN, the Annan Plan introduced and referendum held in 24th of April 2004 in North and South Cyprus. While in the North 64.9 % of participants voted yes to the plan, in the South 75.8 % voted no. Since one side rejected the Annan Plan the Cyprus problem was not solved before the SCGA’s entry to the EU. Thus, the situation emerged which is very problematic to the EU. Turkey’s objection regarding the membership of the SCGA as “Cyprus” was not taken into account by the EU. Turkey argued that the membership against Treaty of Guarantee. According to the Treaty Article I (2) Cyprus undertook “not to participate, in whole or in part, in any political or economic union with any State whatever or partition of the Island”. Article II (2) also mentioned, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom agreed “to prohibit, so far as concerns them, any activity aimed at promoting, directly or indirectly, either union of Cyprus with any other State or partition of the Island”. The membership of the EU also problematic for the Constitution of 1960, which provides for the President and Vice-President to have, separately and conjointly, a right of veto in decisions concerning, inter alia, “foreign affairs, except the participation of the Republic in international organizations and pacts of alliance in which the Kingdom of Greece and the Republic of Turkey both participate”. Turkey’s objections were disregarded. Despite the Yes votes to the Annan Plan from the North, the isolations faced the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) continued. It should be realized that the establishment of a state in which both communities live with peace and harmony in Cyprus would be very difficult job. To force the two ethnically, religiously, linguistically and culturally different communities to live in the same state and rule the state together contradicts post Cold War international events. In Europe Czechoslovakia divided and the two states emerged as Czech Republic and Slovakia and both of them became the EU member. The former Yugoslavia disintegrated and Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Croatia, and Slovenia became independent states. Even Montenegro separated from Serbia with the referendum and became the new state of Europe. The recent declaration of independence of Kosovo is another example of separation. Kosovo’s independence has been recognized by many EU countries and the US. However the same countries do not recognize the TRNC. This is the contradiction, which will be emphasized or at least brought up in any discussion about the Cyprus question.
In 1960, the Cyprus Republic was established with the international agreements signed by the Turkish and Greek Cypriots as well as Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom. This state was a result of compromise between Greek policy of Enosis (island’s unification with Greece) and Turkish policy of partition of the island. However, the partnership state adventure did not work and separation of the two communities of Cyprus started in 1963. The Greek Cypriots denied the constitutional rights of the Turkish Cypriots and terrorized the Turks in Cyprus. As a result the state which was established in 1960 collapsed. The final blow to the state came with the coup supported by Greece to annex the Cyprus in 1974. As a result Turkey used its right to intervene accordance with the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee. The two communities separated and Turkish Cypriots first established Turkish Federal State of Cyprus and in 1983 the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was founded. The two communities in the island have lived separately in their own states since 1974. Despite its lack of recognition the TRNC has all the elements of a state certainly more than Kosovo has. The SCGA has no authority in the north and TRNC has its own government, territory and a permanent population. Besides accepting the Annan plan Turks in Cyprus showed their will for the solution. The Greek side of the dispute, however, rejected the plan. The Annan plan envisaged the establishment of a new bi-zonal Cypriot state. According to Annan Plan, the United Cyprus Republic would be an independent and sovereign state with a single legal personality and a federal government consists of two constituent states, namely the Greek Cypriot State and the Turkish Cypriot State. The constituent states are of equal status. All Cypriot citizens shall also enjoy internal constituent state citizenship status. Other than in elections of Senators, which shall be elected by Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots separately, political rights at the federal level shall be exercised based on internal constituent state citizenship status. Political rights at the constituent state and local level shall be exercised at the place of permanent residency. However, this plan was rejected from the Greek side. Since 2004 there has not been a development towards the solution. Meanwhile in Europe the discussion about the status of Kosovo continued and finally Kosovo became an independent state.
In 1989 Milosevic abolished the Kosovo’s constitutional status granted in 1974 by the Yugoslavia’s constitution. Organizations which supported independence of Kosovo organized “referendum” in 1991 and “Kosovo Republic” was declared as a result. Afterwards with the leadership of Ibrahim Rugova Albanian resistance started. Later Kosovo Liberation Army organized and led the armed resistance against Serbian Administration. In 1998 Serbia conducted operation in Kosovo. Talks to solve the crisis held in Rambouillet ended with failure and NATO operation against Serbia started in March 1999 and in June 1999 Kosovo Force settled in Kosovo. Negotiations about the status of Kosovo were failed and then United Nations Special Envoy of Kosovo, Ahtisaari presented the plan about the status of Kosovo. Ahtisaari suggested independence for Kosovo. According to the Ahtisaari Plan Kosovo will be a multi-ethnic society, governing itself democratically and with full respect for the rule of law, the highest level of internationally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms, and which promotes the peaceful and prosperous existence of all its inhabitants. Kosovo will have the right to negotiate and conclude international agreements, including the right to seek membership in international organizations. Kosovo will be responsible for managing its own affairs and for fulfilling its obligations under the settlement. An International Civilian Representative will be appointed to supervise the implementation of the Settlement and support the relevant efforts of Kosovo’s authorities. After the Ahtisaari plan, Serbia stated that it would not recognize the independence of Kosovo and Russia also stated that it would not support any plan which rejected by Serbia. Despite this, on 17 February 2008 Kosovo declared independence. While the US and many of the EU countries recognized the independence of Kosovo, Serbia condemned this declaration and Russia warned about the consequences of the independence of Kosovo and considered the declaration of independence as the violation of international law.
Countries, which recognized the independence of Kosovo, did not recognize the TRNC despite the fact that TRNC was established in 1983. The question is that are the countries which recognized the independence of Kosovo ready for the recognition of the TRNC? Considering the fact that the two communities in Cyprus have lived separately since 1974 and their differences (ethnic, linguistic, religious and cultural etc.), it would be logical to envisage the two separate state in Cyprus. Just like in Kosovo, rather tense historical process existed in Cyprus between the two communities. While rejecting the Annan Plan, the Greek side of the Cyprus question knew that despite the rejection, they would become the member of the EU and the Turkish side might be in disadvantageous position despite the expected initial reaction towards the Greek side. In fact the SCGA became a member of the EU and isolations faced the TRNC continued. However, the independence of Kosovo and more importantly a wave of recognition for this independence alarmed the SCGA. Certainly after the Kosovo’s independence, TRNC has an advantageous position in any negotiation regarding the Cyprus question. Although Ahtisaati stated that Kosovo was the unique case and would not be example of other cases in international area, as it is clear that there are many similarities between Kosovo and Cyprus cases and even compare with Kosovo example which has not ready to rule itself yet, the TRNC has all the ability to run the state and the Turkish side proofed this in last 25 years of its declaration of an independent state.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kamer KASIM
