Federation framework, renewed Annan Plan, encirclement of Anatolia from the south
Federation framework, renewed Annan Plan, encirclement of Anatolia from the south
Victor Papadopoulos, Director of the Press Office of the President of the Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus (GCASC), said on July 21 that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres “has a plan and a roadmap to break the deadlock and reach a solution” on Cyprus. He added that the coming weeks would be critical.
Papadopoulos also stated that the GCASC government had “launched an international campaign and an effort to restart negotiations for the settlement of the Cyprus issue.” He said these efforts were focused on “mobilizing the UN Secretary-General to take a new initiative, so that the prolonged deadlock can be broken and the long-sought solution to the Cyprus problem can be achieved on the basis of the relevant UN resolutions, international law, and the principles and values of the European Union.”
According to the Politis newspaper in the GCASC, Papadopoulos said Guterres’ plan “aims, on the one hand, to offer Türkiye incentives and benefits so that it agrees to the resumption of talks from where they left off, and, on the other, to ensure the EU’s presence in the negotiation process in order to guarantee that any solution is compatible with the acquis communautaire and EU principles.”
Although Papadopoulos’ remarks do not make clear exactly what Guterres’ “plan and roadmap to break the deadlock and reach a solution” entails, two assessments from the Turkish side shed light on what this may mean.
We will feature the views of two figures: Sabahattin İsmail, former adviser to Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) President Rauf Denktaş, former chief of staff at the Prime Ministry, and former director of the Publicity Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and Cem Gürdeniz, a retired Rear Admiral of the Turkish Navy and one of the coiners of the term “Blue Homeland” (Mavi Vatan).
İsmail offered an extensive analysis on his X account.
Ismail issued the following call: “the UN, which has no authority to present a settlement plan, will present a NATO solution plan at the 5+1 conference to be held at the end of July. Türkiye and the TRNC must never allow this. The 5+1 conference must not be held unless our conditions are accepted.”
His assessment was as follows, with subheadings added by UWI.
A report by Dionysios Dionysiou in the Greek Cypriot newspaper Politis contained the details of a so-called settlement plan allegedly prepared by Holguin, the personal envoy of UN Secretary-General Guterres.
At first, I didn’t believe the report. But when I checked with sources I trust, I saw that it was true.
Concession from certain circles in Türkiye?
UN Secretary-General Guterres and his personal envoy Holguin have gone down a very wrong path. The reason they have taken this wrong path may be that certain circles they met in Türkiye encouraged them to do so. I believe these circles created the impression that Türkiye might make concessions on Cyprus in exchange for the Customs Union, the visa issue, the SAFE matter, and the resumption of accession negotiations.
I had foreseen years ago that this would happen. For that reason, when the Crans-Montana process collapsed in 2017 after the Greek Cypriot side walked away from the table, I made the following proposal:
The federation framework
Let us leave the framework of the UN Good Offices Mission, which envisages a federation in Cyprus. Since they have repeatedly rejected partnership, let us announce that we will no longer discuss any form of partnership with the Greek Cypriots. Let us formally demand the repeal of UN Security Council resolutions 186 (1964), 541 (1983), and 550 (1984), which block recognition of the TRNC. Let us declare that we will not enter into any negotiations unless the TRNC is recognized, and the isolations are lifted.
But none of this was done. Not only that, but in 2020, the green light was given to the UN which has no mandate to discuss a solution other than federation to convene a 5+1 conference “to explore whether there is common ground”.
We reacted very strongly. We warned that once this process was allowed to move forward, it would be extremely difficult to stop. But our warnings went unheeded. As if that were not enough, a new proposal then emerged: Guterres would appoint a personal envoy, Holguin, who would come to the island and hold contacts to see whether common ground could be found.
We reacted just as strongly to this as well. We said: “There is no need for this. Do not allow the issue to be pushed back into the federation framework. The UN will bring nothing other than federation, because that is what the UN Security Council resolutions envisage.” But again, no one listened.
Holguin was appointed, and she began shuttling between Cyprus, Türkiye, Greece, Britain, the EU, and the US in an effort to restart federation talks.
While all this was happening, we thought that the four conditions put forward by Tufan Erhürman, who had won the elections in the TRNC, for the launch of negotiations would stop the UN. Yet neither these conditions nor Türkiye’s demand that the TRNC’s sovereign equality and equal international status be confirmed by the UN Security Council was taken into account. Guterres’ personal envoy Holguin simply ignored our conditions and continued her shuttle diplomacy to bring federation talks back onto the agenda. And now she keeps insisting: “A call will be issued for a 5+1 conference at the end of July, and the plan I have prepared will be discussed there. Whoever comes, comes; whoever does not, does not.”
What Türkiye should do
To prevent this imposition, Türkiye must tell her clearly: “Stop. You cannot issue an invitation for a 5+1 conference without our approval, and you certainly cannot present a settlement plan. The UN has no authority to present such a plan. First, the sovereign equality and equal international status of the TRNC must be confirmed by the UN Security Council. At the very least, the four conditions of President Tufan Erhürman must be accepted by the Greek Cypriot administration.”
If Türkiye does not say this forcefully, Holguin will make a fait accompli and bypass our condition of “sovereign equality and equal international status,” which Türkiye has repeatedly emphasized, as well as President Erhürman’s four preconditions. And then, in order not to appear as “the side that rejected” the process, we will inevitably find ourselves dragged into an open-ended process.
Only Türkiye can stop this imposition. We will see whether it does so and whether it tells Guterres and Holguin to stop.
An expanded and softened version of the Annan Plan
The text published by Politis is essentially an expanded and softened version of the Annan Plan, which the Greek Cypriots rejected in 2004, and of what had been agreed in Crans-Montana in 2017 before the Greek Cypriot side walked away from the negotiation.
It supposedly envisages a partnership based on two constituent states, each with its own parliament, but without separate sovereignty, and with a rotating presidency. At least one Turkish Cypriot approval would supposedly be required in the government’s decision-making process. Our most valuable lands (Maraş, Mesarya, and Güzelyurt) would be handed over to the Greek Cypriots. This means handing over at least 40 villages, one district, and three municipalities; uprooting at least 100,000 of our people and making them refugees for the fourth time; surrendering one-fifth of TRNC territory, our most fertile irrigated agricultural lands, and 75 percent of our underground water resources to the Greek Cypriots. One would have to be either mad or a bought-off traitor to accept this.
It further envisages: We are supposedly going to enter the EU together with the Greek Cypriots, even though Türkiye is not a full member, and Cyprus is supposedly going to join NATO. Türkiye’s effective and actual guarantorship would come to an end and be replaced by a NATO guarantee; foreign troops would come to the island. Within the framework of “constructive ambiguity,” the Greek Cypriots would be able to call this new state a “federation,” while the Turks would be able to call it a confederation. During a two-year transition period, there would be a joint parliament and a joint presidential council; Turkish troops would begin to withdraw; the isolation and restrictions imposed on the Turkish people would be lifted; and our demand known as the “3 Ds” – direct trade, direct flights, and direct contact – would supposedly be met. Türkiye would open its sea and airports to Greek Cypriot ships and planes. Eastern Mediterranean natural gas would be transported through Türkiye. The Customs Union would be modernized, and visa problems would supposedly be resolved in Türkiye’s relations with the EU; full membership negotiations would begin; Türkiye would be included in the SAFE agreement, and so on.
These are, in fact, the basic demands of Christodoulides and, behind the scenes, of Greece and Israel, which want to push Türkiye out of the island. This wicked trio wants the EU to offer Türkiye certain concessions, and in return wants Türkiye to hand Cyprus over to the Greek Cypriots, Greece, the EU, and Israel.
“Türkiye can’t give up on Cyprus”
This plan essentially asks Türkiye to make major territorial concessions, remove Turkish citizens from the island, and ultimately give up on Cyprus in return for benefits it would receive from the EU.
But Türkiye can never give up on Cyprus. Türkiye cannot, and must not abandon Cyprus to the wicked quartet of the Greek Cypriots, Greece, the EU, and Israel. Because this would destroy not only the security of the Turkish Cypriot people, but Türkiye’s own security as well.
The defense of Türkiye and of the Blue Homeland begins in Cyprus. Moreover, giving up on Cyprus would destroy Türkiye’s legitimate rights and interests in the Eastern Mediterranean, its energy resources, the strategic advantage it has gained through the TRNC, and the Blue Homeland concept itself.
Bribers, money launderers, gambling barons, and corrupt networks in Cyprus
The only way to protect our legitimate rights and interests in Cyprus is to purge the bribers, thieves, profiteers, looters, money launderers, gambling barons, and corrupt networks; to establish a just order by raising our people to a high level of prosperity; and to ensure that the TRNC lives forever as an independent and sovereign state.
Because if a significant section of the public today looks favorably upon Holguin’s plan of surrender, the reason lies in the system of bribery, favoritism, profiteering, plunder, patronage, gambling, and dirty money in the TRNC.
Cem Gürdeniz made the following assessment on his X account:
On the eve of the NATO Summit, faits accomplis targeting Türkiye are coming one after another.
First, the Greek press reported that the Halki Seminary on Heybeliada would be reopened in September. The issue was debated for days and caused a major stir, yet no satisfactory statement came from Ankara.
Now we are learning from the Greek Cypriot press that preparations are under way for a new settlement process in Cyprus. According to reports in the Politis newspaper published in the GCASC, UN Secretary-General Guterres and his envoy Holguin are working on a new formula that would, for the third time after the 2017 Crans-Montana process, pull the island back into a federation-based framework.
US-Israel-Greece-GCASC initiatives
What is especially striking here is the timing. At a time when the US, Israel, Greece, and the GCASC have been relentlessly pursuing military, diplomatic, and energy-centered initiatives against Türkiye in the Eastern Mediterranean, the emergence of a new 5+1 formula cannot be a coincidence.
What is more important, reports the Greek and Greek Cypriot media suggest that Ankara is not opposed to this initiative. Unfortunately, in recent times we have come to learn about many critical developments concerning Türkiye not from our own state institutions, but from the press in Athens and Nicosia. (Also, we had learned from the Greek Cypriot press that, at the 2017 Crans-Montana summit, Ankara had agreed to withdraw troops from the island).
Those who have learned no lessons from what happened in the Iran-Israel-US war that began on February 28, 2026; those who are trying to repeat the mistakes made during the 2004 Annan Plan and the 2017 Crans-Montana processes are the ones who wants to plunge our future into darkness for the sake of short-term gains. What they are doing is not diplomacy or negotiation.
Türkiye’s policies towards the EU, NATO, and the US
Nor can this process be evaluated separately from the policies Türkiye has pursued in recent years in its relations with the EU, NATO, and the US. Ankara keeps creating new expectations without obtaining concrete and binding gains from the other side on issues of extreme geopolitical importance. While topics such as SAFE, the Customs Union, visa liberalization, the membership perspective, and defense cooperation stay only on the paper, new concessions are being demanded from Türkiye.
Let us recall that the brazen Türkiye Report adopted by the European Parliament on June 7, 2026, targets the Blue Homeland and the TRNC. Around the same time, the US Congress also approved the Eastern Mediterranean Gateway bill, which targets Türkiye’s maritime geopolitics and entrenches the US-Greece-GCASC-Israel partnership by turning the Eastern Mediterranean and Cyprus into the maritime gateway of IMEC (India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor).
An extremely dangerous proposal
Our history has examples showing that our country under financial pressure, struggling to roll over an ever-growing external debt stock with new borrowing, and experiencing economic fragility, can be forced to make concessions at the negotiation table that it would otherwise not make.
If the information in the Greek Cypriot press is true, the proposal on the table is extremely dangerous. Issues reportedly under discussion include handing over Maraş, Güzelyurt, and part of Mesarya; the gradual withdrawal of Turkish troops; the erosion of Türkiye’s effective and actual guarantorship; the restructuring of the island under the NATO umbrella; and Türkiye opening its ports to Greek Cypriot ships and aircraft. In return, promises such as political equality, effective participation, a common state, direct trade, etc are being offered.
Who could say yes to at least 100,000 of our people being uprooted from their homeland through the transfer of 40 villages, one district, and three municipalities to the Greek Cypriots? Who could accept one-fifth of TRNC territory being handed over, and more importantly, the most fertile irrigated agricultural lands and a large share of underground water resources being left to the Greek Cypriot administration?
The forward bastion of Türkiye’s maritime geopolitics
More importantly, the issue is not merely the TRNC itself. The TRNC is the forward bastion of Türkiye’s maritime geopolitics. If the Eastern Mediterranean is the flagship of the Blue Homeland, then the TRNC is its fleet headquarters. Our presence on the island generates a strategic deterrence equivalent to the deterrence created by our navy. Initiatives that would undermine the independent existence of the TRNC or lead to the withdrawal of Turkish troops from the island should not be a subject of negotiation.
Encirclement of Anatolia from the south
The fact that the TRNC is recognized only by Türkiye cannot serve as a justification for those who defend such processes. For that would mean voluntarily consenting to the encirclement of Anatolia from the south.
The TRNC is not merely a piece of island. It is the only island state of the Turkic world, Türkiye’s forward outpost in the Eastern Mediterranean, its security belt, and its strategic depth. Without Northern Cyprus, it is impossible for Türkiye to establish permanent geopolitical superiority in the Eastern Mediterranean, protect its maritime jurisdiction areas, project power toward the Red Sea and beyond, or make the Blue Homeland doctrine sustainable.
The independent and sovereign existence of the TRNC, together with the Turkish military presence on the island, is of critical importance not only for the protection of our continental shelf and maritime jurisdiction areas in the Eastern Mediterranean, but also for the security of regional trade routes and the defense of Anatolia from the south. For Türkiye, the TRNC is not merely a foreign policy issue, it is a direct priority of national security, maritime geopolitics, and strategic depth.
The upcoming NATO Summit
We’ve seen similar processes during the Annan Plan and the 2017 Crans-Montana talks. If the reports now appearing in the Greek Cypriot press are accurate, it is incomprehensible that there is a desire from our side to fall into the same trap for a third time.
We must be prepared for new demands for concessions in return for Trump’s barrage of compliments at our government during the upcoming NATO Summit in Ankara on July 7-8.