In Berlin this week, President Nikos Christodoulides issued a firm appeal to Ankara: drop your demand for a two-state solution in Cyprus, or put away any serious hopes of advancing your stalled aspirations to join the European Union.
It was more than a diplomatic rebuke — it was a clear-eyed leader defending his nation’s integrity, projecting strength ahead of Cyprus’s upcoming EU presidency. In a moment when strength matters, Christodoulides is showing that restraint does not mean weakness.
Christodoulides spoke after talks with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, making a pointed case: Turkey’s insistence on partitioning Cyprus is not merely a bilateral irritant, but a structural obstacle to Ankara’s European ambitions. He argued, rightly, that rather than gain access to the EU’s defence fund (known as SAFE), Turkey should first abandon policies that undercut European security and legal norms.
This is no empty gesture. Cyprus has lived through the reality of division since 1974, when Turkish forces invaded following a coup. Ever since, the island has remained split—with a Turkish-Cypriot north recognised only by Ankara, and a Greek-Cypriot south representing the internationally recognised Republic of Cyprus.
Christodoulides, leading the south, is not just reminding Turkey of historical grievances — he is reacting to a present-day risk to European cohesion.
Christodoulides’s message is underpinned by the principles enshrined in UN Security Council resolutions. Those resolutions affirm the island’s territorial integrity, rejecting any solution that essentially legitimises a permanent partition. To concede to a two-state demand would not just betray decades of diplomacy, but weaken the role of international law — and deliver Turkey a strategic victory in plain sight of the EU.
Critically, Christodoulides isn’t simply lecturing Ankara; he is leveraging Europe’s leverage. Cyprus will hold the EU’s rotating presidency in early 2026, a rare chance for an island long caught between East and West to influence the bloc’s agenda. In Berlin, the Cypriot leader presented a “very concrete proposal” to Chancellor Merz.
Merz, for his part, voiced interest and ambition. If his government backs Nicosia, Europe has a moment to shape a durable and just solution — not just for Cyprus, but for the EU’s credibility.
Why is this boldness so vital? Because tolerating Turkey’s two-state rhetoric would embolden a dangerous precedent: the formalisation of division not just on Cyprus but in other contested regions. For the EU, that is a slippery slope. For Greece and Cyprus, it is existential.
Critics may argue that Christodoulides should compromise — that some recognition of Northern Cyprus’s autonomy might facilitate peace. But such “compromise” would entail recognition of a separatist state entirely dependent on Ankara, with no meaningful sovereignty independent of Turkish power. It would enshrine the very division the UN and the international community have rejected.
Moreover, Christodoulides is deploying what might be termed “assertive realism.” He refuses to be cast as the hawk, but he will not appease maximalism either. As he put it, Turkey’s declared two-state demand is fundamentally incompatible with a solution grounded in UN resolutions. He is not naïve about the past, but is pragmatic about the future — using the EU presidency, legal principles, and diplomatic alliances to push back against what much of Europe sees as aggressive revisionism.
His strategy also sends a message to Turkish Cypriots: a reunified Cyprus remains the goal, but not at the expense of justice, legality, or independence. By insisting on a UN-based solution, Christodoulides is safeguarding the rights of all Cypriots, not just those in the south — and rejecting a factional demand that risks reducing the Turkish Cypriots to geopolitical bargaining chips.
From a broader European perspective, Christodoulides’s stance is a model of principled leadership. Rather than resort to moralistic grandstanding or bid for populist sympathy, he is appealing to the EU on exactly the grounds Brussels holds dear: rule-based order, institutional legitimacy, and international law.
His warning to Ankara is not ultimatums for their own sake. It is a calculated push — rooted in the belief that Turkey’s EU ambition must be matched by European values. If Ankara truly wants to deepen ties with Europe, it must abandon maximalist demands that undermine the territorial and legal foundations of its partners.
As Cyprus assumes its EU presidency, Christodoulides has signalled his intent to make good on this challenge. He is using his platform not simply to reopen old wounds, but to press for a resolution that is principled, equitable and sustainable. Europe should rally behind him.
Ultimately, Christodoulides’s position is not isolationist, but integrative: he wants a committed, law-abiding Turkey as a neighbour — not a revisionist power that exploits division. That is not weakness. It is resolve. And in today’s volatile geopolitical climate, such resolve deserves support, not appeasement.
Turkey Engulfed in Unrest as Authorities Crack Down on Journalists
