The referendum on Cyprus’s unification under the United Nations and its heart-breaking verdict dominated the Western media last week. While the Greek Cypriots celebrated their overwhelming rejection vote, although that did not prevent their integration with the European Union on May 1, the Turkish Cypriots felt betrayed despite their yes vote which, however, did not allow them entry into the EU.

The EU has commended the Turkish Cypriots for showing their desire for a unified Cyprus in EU. It has pledged to consider the lifting of economic embargo and other restrictions over the northern parts of the island. The UN has expressed its displeasure with the Greek Cypriot verdict, and so has the United States of America.

In order to console their Turkish counterparts, the Greek Cypriots say that they are not opposed to the unification of the island but to the UN plan which has negative implications for the latter’s rights. They believe that the unification drive must continue nevertheless. Turkish Cypriot leaders however argue that they have already done their best and should not be blamed for the continuation of conflict. The Turkish government responded by saying that “the Greek Cypriot policy of blaming the Turkish side and Turkey with intransigence through distortion of facts, has ... gone bankrupt”. The Turkish government also promised full support to the Turkish Cypriots who laboured for a united Cyprus to become part of the EU.

Towards the goal

To pursue this goal, the Turkish Cypriots, their pro-settlement leaders and the central government of Turkey had made a kind of united effort to follow the UN guidelines over Cyprus settlement. Earlier, when Turkey was not in favour of the Cyprus settlement under the bi-zonal, bi-communal federal framework, it had emphasized the “security” factor of Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean. So was the case with the president of northern Cyprus, Rauf Denktash.

Both the Turkish and their counterparts in Cyprus wanted a confederation of two states on the island. Such a solution was always rejected by the EU, UN and Greek Cypriots who stressed on the federal solution for Cyprus. Turkish attitude began to change mainly due to two major factors. First, the formal accession negotiation between the EU and Greek Cypriots which started in March 1998 to include Cyprus (with or without settlement) in the EU in 2004, so that Turkey could avoid a hostile EU neighbourhood in the eastern Mediterranean. Second, Turkey wanted to show its sincerity towards its promises made to the EU.

Still in isolation

Since the EU invitation to the Greek-held Cyprus in 1995, the EU began to link in the Turkish prospect. Both the EU and the US had warned Turkey about the consequences of its policies towards Cyprus. But unlike its predecessors, the Turkish government decided to adopt the UN route. It went to the extent of cajoling Denktash to get back to the bi-zonal federal arrangement. The Turkish prime minister also mobilized pro-settlement Turkish Cypriots. Despite Denktash’s warnings, Turkish Cypriots first showed their pro-settlement mind in the parliamentary elections of northern Cyprus last December and finally on April 24. The Turkish government has also defied established principles and even ignored the suggestions of the former Turkish premier, Bulent Ecevit, against the move.

All such efforts have however managed to only get some words of hope from the EU. In a U-turn, Turkey has now appealed to the world community to reward the Turkish Cypriots by lifting embargoes. This message can be seen as a fresh Turkish policy to recognize Cyprus as an independent entity. However, there is possibility that the world opinion would quickly change against Turkish Cypriots, who have remained isolated since 1964. The “yes” has created a favourable political climate for Turkey, which would be more confident in sharing dialogue with the EU. Greek Cypriots now cannot claim to represent the whole island. But the enlarged EU, along with the Greek Cypriots, would further burden Turkey psychologically and politically.