Questions have been raised following recent statements by President Nikos Christodoulides regarding the Cyprus issue, particularly in relation to the British Bases.
After suggesting that negotiations should now take place over the future of the British Bases, the President also called on Turkish Cypriots to return to the structure of the Republic of Cyprus so that they could participate in negotiations with the United Kingdom.
The statement, delivered publicly and broadcast live, has prompted debate about the strategy pursued by the Greek Cypriot side. According to the criticism expressed, the position that Turkish Cypriots could participate in negotiations “after returning to the Republic of Cyprus” represents a departure from the agreed framework for a settlement and moves away from positions that had previously been abandoned.
Concerns over strategic direction
Observers also point to the contrast between these statements and the President’s recent meeting with United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, during which, according to the President, discussions focused on creating conditions for the resumption of negotiations before the end of Guterres’s term.
Critics argue that the position presented by Christodoulides appears inconsistent with United Nations resolutions and the agreed framework of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation. They say this creates the impression that the President is moving without a clear strategic direction and risks undermining the framework within which the Greek Cypriot side officially seeks a solution.
Concerns about political impact
According to the criticism expressed, the practical consequence of such statements could be to reinforce the position of the Turkish side and those Turkish Cypriots who favour maintaining the current status quo.
When the Greek Cypriot leadership appears to distance itself from previously agreed parameters, critics argue, it provides arguments to those who claim that there is no longer a common basis for negotiations.
Questions over the President’s intentions
The debate has also raised questions about the political intention behind the President’s remarks.
Some commentators question whether the statements represent a deliberate political move aimed at a domestic audience or reflect a misjudgment of their potential consequences.
According to this line of criticism, if the statements are intended for domestic political purposes, they risk shifting the focus of the Cyprus issue towards short-term political considerations rather than the substance of the negotiations.
Erhürman’s reaction
Turkish Cypriot leader Tufan Erhürman reacted to the statements, focusing mainly on what he described as the inconsistency of the positions expressed.
In a social media post addressing the President, Erhürman argued that the sequence of statements appeared contradictory. Referring to previous positions, he noted that the discussion had moved from the proposal to “resume negotiations from where they left off in Crans-Montana”, to a “five-point roadmap”, and later to a call for Turkish Cypriots to return to the Republic of Cyprus.
He described these positions as “fantastical ideas beyond the limits of logic and reality”.
Erhürman added that the statements ranged from references to possible NATO membership to the issue of the British Bases, and even suggestions that Turkey should recognise itself.
According to the Turkish Cypriot leader, “the successive presentation of so many contradictory, unsubstantiated and careless statements can only be the result of a kind of panic that sets aside reason.”