Why Turkiye wants the two-state solution for Cyprus

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said recently the two-state solution for Cyprus is not an option and Germany will continue to promote de-escalation of tensions on the island and the internationally recognised bizonal, bicommunal federal solution reuniting together the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities.

Why did Ankara adopt the notion of using the “two-state solution” as cover for promoting the partition of Cyprus? The case of Palestine is the explanation, of course.

The “two-state solution,” i.e., partition, was initially proposed by Britain in 1937 as the means to resolve the conflict between Palestinians and Zionists. Partition was rejected by the 72 per cent majority Palestinians but welcomed by the leader of the 28 per cent minority Jewish community in Palestine and Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben Gurion. He took the view that “a Jewish state on only part of Palestine is not the end but the beginning (and) helps in the possession of the land as a whole.” The plan was abandoned as “impracticable.” Nevertheless, partition was proposed by Britain in 1947 — when the percentages of Palestinians and Jewish Zionists were the same — and adopted that November by UN General Assembly resolution 181 dividing Palestine into Palestinian Arab and Jewish states. The Arab world rejected this project, the Zionists said they accepted the partition plan and map, which gave them 55 per cent of the country and Palestinians 45 per cent. The Zionist underground army promptly invaded, occupied and ethnically cleansed areas awarded to the Palestinian state, leaving Palestinians in possession of 22 per cent of their homeland at the end of the 1948-49 war.

After Israel conquered the 22 per cent — East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza — in 1967, the UN Security Council adopted resolution 242 which called for Israel to withdraw “from territories occupied in the (June) conflict.” Due to Israeli and US pressure, this resolution did not specify “all territories.” Instead, Israel — which had no intention of implementing 242 — constructed settlements on newly conquered land, deemed illegal under international law. This began the long-term process of eliminating the “two-state solution” for Palestine by absorbing the territory which should have become Palestine.

However, the international community has clung to the fiction of the “two-state solution” which remains regarded, impracticably, as the “reasonable” — even “honourable” — way to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli struggle over possession of Palestine. While clinging to this fiction, the international community had done nothing to halt Israeli settlement activity and promote the “two-state solution.” The Palestinian background and international acceptance of the fictional “two-state solution” seems to have encouraged Turkiye and allied Turkish Cypriots to adopt this as an acceptable slogan for Cyprus. This is because the 1983 Turkish Cypriot declaration of independence has not been recognised by any country but Turkiye. Therefore, in 2021, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Turkish Cypriot counterpart Ersin Tatar have rejected the internationally mandated bizonal, bicommunal federal model and the reunification of Cyprus and insisted on the “two-state solution.” If internationally accepted, this would amount to long-sought recognition of Turkish Cypriot independence and the permanent division of the island.

There is, however, a major difference between the adoption of the “two-state solution” by Turkey and its tactical acceptance by the Zionist movement and Israel. Turkey has long sought the partition of Cyprus while the Zionists/Israelis never wanted the partition of Palestine and used the ruse of the “two-state solution,” adopted formally in 1974, as cover to proceed with the expropriation of all Palestine and Syria’s Golan Heights.

Partition of Cyprus was first proposed in 1956 by Nihat Erim, an adviser to Turkiye’s Prime Minister Adnan Menderes. Erim’s plan was for the establishment of two separate political entities, one Greek Cypriot, the other Turkish Cypriot, which would form political unions with Greece and Turkey. The dividing proposed at that time was similar to the post-1974 occupation line. It is significant that Erim also held that Turkey should be involved in providing security for the Greek sector in the island — a notion Greek Cypriots have always rejected.

Nevertheless, his idea was incorporated into the deal for Cypriot independence from Britain which appointed Turkiye, Greece and Britan as guarantors of the bicommunal republic. This led to Turkiye’s invasion and occupation of the northern 36 per cent of the island in response to the 1974 failed coup against Cypriot President Makarios. Britain did nothing although it had troops on the island and should have intervened against the coupists and pre-empted the Turks but was ordered by the US not to intervene.

Having occupied the north of Cyprus, Turkiye followed the Zionist strategy of deception: Ankara backed negotiations intended to reunify the island while planting mainland settlers — who now number 189,000 as compared to 145,000 Turkish Cypriots. Turkiye also installed 35-40,000 Turkish troops in the north and tied the Turkish Cypriot economy to that of the Turkish mainland.

However, there is considerable Turkish Cypriot opposition to the “two state solution” and support for reunification in a bizonal, bicommunal state. Last November, Erdogan complained about this lack of support. Turkish Cypriots resent impositions by Ankara, which controls and funds the Turkish Cypriot entity. They are angered by the construction of religious schools while investment in secular public schools is low. They fear curtailment of freedom speech and assembly. Turkish Cypriots who speak out against Turkiye’s policies and call for reunification have been declared persona non grata by Ankara and refused entry to Turkiye.

Erdogan has pledged to increase Turkish army deployment in the north although the military force already outnumbers the Greek-Cypriot majority Cyprus republic’s National Guard by a ratio of 3-4 to one. Erdogan also plans to build a naval base in the north. As north Cyprus has been in crisis due to mainland Turkiye’s economic and financial melt-down, many Turkish Cypriots been angered over the building of a multi-million-dollar government and parliamentary complex near the Green Line which divides the island. They argue this money should be invested in infrastructure and welfare projects.

Divisions of freed British Empire territories was the logical consequence of British policies of divide-and-rule while in occupation and divide-and-leave when the demand for independence by colonies became irresistible. Among the colonies in its vast empire, these policies were applied to Canada and the US in the 19th century; India and Pakistan in 1947; Palestine and Israel in 1948; and Cyprus when Turkey invaded in 1974.

The violence and ethnic cleansing which accompanied the partitions of India, Palestine, and Cyprus has created continuing anger and resentment and led to warfare. India and Pakistan have skirmished over Kashmir and India backed the Bangladesh war of secession from Pakistan. In this region there have been a succession of wars waged by Israel against stateless Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt. Turkiye has repeatedly intervened repeatedly in Cyprus following independence in 1960 and 48 years ago mounted a full-scale invasion, occupation of the north, the de facto partition of the island and, recently, the demand for the “two state solution.”