EditCyprus at crossroads: Erdoğan’s ideological mutation and the island’s future
The evolution of Ankara’s position on the Cyprus issue is part of a broader political shift in Turkey
From the expectation of reunification to the hardening of the partition option, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s changing policy on Cyprus reflects Turkey’s profound political transformation – and shapes the island’s uncertain future, writes Murat Yildiz.
Murat Yildiz is a Turkish independent journalist and producer, active in the print press, the internet, radio and television.
The island of Cyprus has long been a symbol of pain and hope; a hotbed of conflicting identities and global diplomacy. Erdoğan, who once supported reunification in line with European goals, has now adopted a nationalist strategy, advocating for an irreversible division. More than a simple policy shift, this shift lays the foundation for a new chapter in Cyprus’s troubled history and reflects the radical changes in Turkey’s own political landscape.
From a pro-European reformer who supported reunification based on the Annan Plan, to an ardent “nationalist” in favour of a two-state solution, Erdoğan’s political evolution on the Cyprus issue constitutes a remarkable trajectory. This change shows how the Cyprus issue has become a tool for Turkey’s broader internal and international readjustment – while at the same time reflecting Erdoğan’s personal ideological journey.
Early 2000s: European perspective and Annan Plan
Erdoğan positioned himself as a reformist leader who supported Turkey’s European path during the first years of his rule. The Cyprus issue was reinterpreted as a manageable obstacle to the island’s EU accession. In April 2004, Erdoğan publicly showed annoyance when Greek Cypriots rejected in a referendum the UN-backed Annan Plan, which was approved by Turkish Cypriots. “It is clear which side wants peace and which side is avoiding the solution,” he said.
2007–2010: Internal upheavals, military resistance and realpolitik
Erdoğan’s foreign policy became more assertive as he faced internal resistance from Turkey’s military-bureaucratic elite and consolidated his power. He began to introduce nationalist ideas, although he continued to publicly support reunification.
“We support a just, sustainable solution on the island, based on political equality,” he said in 2009. However, the background in Ankara was cold, with less emphasis on the EU and more on protecting the rights of Turkish Cypriots.
2011–2016: Arab Spring, regional turmoil and hardening rhetoric
Erdogan’s authoritarian turn coincided with a rupture in Turkey-EU relations. Tensions rose in the Eastern Mediterranean over hydrocarbon exploitation. “The EU did not keep its promises… the accession of Southern Cyprus alone was a historic mistake,” Erdoğan said, accusing the EU of hypocrisy and bad faith.
Cyprus ceased to be a matter of reunification and became a matter of resistance to alleged Western betrayal.
After 2017: Adoption of a two-state solution and the new Erdoğan doctrine
“From now on, the federal solution is no longer on the table,” Erdoğan said after the failure of negotiations in Crans-Montana in 2017.
By 2021, he was publicly supporting separation and fully adopting the rhetoric of Turkish nationalist positions.
“On this island there are two peoples and two states,” he said during his visit to the occupied territories. “There is nothing left to negotiate.” This was a turning point: the Cyprus issue was no longer seen as a problem to be solved and was now seen as a geopolitical fait accompli.
Perceptions in the Greek Cypriot media
Some Greek Cypriot analysts in the early 2000s, initially optimistic about Erdoğan’s rise, reportedly said: “Let’s solve it now that he is in power – he doesn’t see Cyprus as a problem.” (Citizen, April 2004)
This cautious optimism reflected the belief that Erdoğan’s pragmatic rhetoric and pro-European stance could open new paths for reunification. However, over the next decade, this climate worsened dramatically. In the late 2010s and early 2020s, Greek and Cypriot media portrayed Erdoğan as a leader with expansionist ambitions, exploiting Cyprus for geopolitical gain.
This shift from hope to concern reflects the broader regional tension and Erdoğan’s nationalist trajectory.
Characteristic statements by President Erdoğan
- 2019: Response to Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akıncı
Following Akıncı’s criticism of Turkey’s military operation in Syria, Erdoğan reportedly stated:
“He needs to learn his limits.”
The statement was widely interpreted as an attempt to silence dissent in the Turkish Cypriot leadership.
- 2025: Criticising Turkish Cypriot protesters
During demonstrations in the occupied territories against the lifting of the headscarf ban in public schools, Erdoğan reportedly called the protest “insolent” and said:
“If you don’t come at them forcefully, they don’t know their limits.”
The statement was seen as an attempt to suppress opposition to Ankara’s policy.
Reactions in the Greek Cypriot media and from experts
- Christos Stylianides, former European Commissioner (Cypriot):
“Erdogan’s rhetoric shifted from the realism of hope to a complete rejection of the peace process, undermining any prospect of a just and lasting solution.”
(Kathimerini, interview, 2019)
- Makarios Drousiotis, political analyst (Greek Cypriot):
“The shift to a two-state solution clearly shows that Ankara seeks to perpetuate the division and disregard international law.”
(Citizen, comment, 2021)
- Kathimerini, editorial article, July 2021 (on Erdoğan’s visit to Varoşi):
“This act is a provocation that discredits decades of diplomatic efforts and international consensus.”
- Cyprus Mail, 2020:
“Erdogan’s transformation reflects Turkey’s broader authoritarian turn – and Cyprus remains the main stage for this new aggressive stance.”
Final thoughts
Erdoğan’s transformation on the Cyprus issue represents a broader political shift in Turkey. What began as pro-European pragmatism has been replaced by a nationalist, aggressive stance, using Cyprus as a symbol and tool for domestic political stabilization. This shift reflects the shift in Turkey’s political identity and evolving geopolitical balances, with power and sovereignty serving as a source of inspiration for its people in a context of increasing authoritarianism.
According to the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, “sons bury their fathers in peace, but fathers bury their sons in war.”
The Cyprus issue, steeped in conflicting narratives and historical trauma, continues to deeply affect the island and the politics and identities of those who claim it. Erdoğan’s “turn” on Cyprus is thus a painful reminder that historical legacy and domestic political needs are often inseparable – determining developments for generations to come.
Consequently, Cyprus remains much more than a territorial issue: it is the stage on which Erdoğan’s changing vision for Turkey is unfolding, weaving old wounds and new ambitions into a narrative that is far from over.
The original version of this commentary was published by EUalive’s partner IBNA agency.
Disclaimer: EUalive doesn’t necessarily share the opinion of the guest authors and is open to publishing other views on the same topic.
Caption: Abandoned smashed out buildings line a street running through Varosha, Cyprus, 16 October 2020. The suburb was abandoned by its Greek Cypriot residents when Turkey invaded the island in 1974 after a brief Greek inspired coup. EPA/KATIA CHRISTODOULOU
Updated: August 5, 2025 - 09:04
