By Simon Davidson, with support from the UF Travel Group
IN THE PAST MONTHS, news and social media have been flooded with pictures of soldiers, terrorists, and crying civilians. A brutal war goes on between Israel and Palestine, a conflict with roots from when the British ruled the area as one land. It is one land but two parts, one land but two people, and one land but two religions. A description as suitable for Israel-Palestine as for the topic of this article; Cyprus.
In more than a half-century the island of Cyprus has been divided in two, with the United Nations’ no man’s land in between. Not long after gaining independence from the UK in 1960, tensions and fighting arose between the majority group of Greek Cypriots and the minority of Turk Cypriots. To prevent further violence, a UN peacekeeping force was established, patrolling the border to this day. The conflict escalated in 1974, with the Turkish occupation of the northern third of the island. Turkey’s actions were a reaction to a coup d’état in Cyprus supported by the military junta in Athens. Afterwards, in 1983, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus proclaimed independence. Ever since, the island has de facto consisted of two states, although only Turkey recognises Northern Cyprus’ sovereignty.
To understand the island and its unique situation, we have been in Cyprus and talked to two Turkish-speaking students living in Northern Cyprus. They might be able to give you, the reader, a picture of how a conflict that broke out in the 1960s affects young people today. Dogukan Akdeniz is a Ph.D. student in international relations, with family roots from the south side of the island. Selim Burak Alptekin is a master’s student in international relations, with a father from Turkey and a mother from the divided capital of Nicosia.
“In more than a half-century the island of Cyprus has been divided in two, with the United Nations’ no man’s land in between.”
When asked how they view the conflict, they explain how most people their age do not see the situation as a conflict. To clarify his point Selim says that the northern side has been living in peace since 1974, compared to Israel and Palestine for example which have a different situation. Not only the island but also the generations on it are divided. Among older generations, where family members might have been lost in violence, the word conflict is not an understatement. The two students describe how some older people feel threatened by the other side.
Despite having the UN buffer zone, the green line as it is called, dividing Turks and Greeks, both students describe the island as having a common cultural foundation. Dogukan explains how Turkish and Greek Cypriots share certain words, despite speaking two different languages. To further clarify his point, one word he mentions as an example translates to “common”. Selim continues on the same topic:
“I always considered that both sides of the island are closer to one another in how they act and how they are, then they would be to the ethnicity they’re coming from. I don’t think Greek Cypriots here are closer to the Greeks from Greece, or that the Turks from here are any closer to the Turks from Turkey.”
Divided as they are, he means that the people on the island have more in common with each other than they have with their respective ethnicity on the mainland in Greece and Turkey. Selim and Dogukan describe themselves as, first of all, Cypriots and neither of them puts any special emphasis on their Turkish identity. They think most young people define themselves as Cypriots. Selim says:
“I would want to just say I’m Cypriot and be done with it, without needing to put a parenthesis in between saying I’m Turkish, because this is just as much as my country, as their (the Greek Cypriot’s) country.”
Selim adds that in contrast to most people, his upbringing makes him identify strongly with his religion. They agree that Northern Cyprus is a very secular Islamic society. With such an attitude from the young, it is not surprising that unification was close in 2004.
An insight into the academic and mediation work regarding “The Cyprus Question” and the unification plan of 2004:
“In the years 1999-2004 the Department of Peace and Conflict Research was involved in a so-called Track II effort to connect the different sides in the conflict, supporting the mediation efforts of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The first contact was established in early 1999 when Diego Cordovez from Ecuador was the Special Representative for this conflict. We in the Department brought personalities from the two Cypriot/Cypriotic communities to Sigtuna in mid-March 1999. The common experience for all participants was to go skating on the ice of Mälaren. Definitely an exercise that brought them together! The participants included the mayors of divided Nicosia, who both wanted to unify their city. Later meetings took place in Greece and Turkey, thanks to an official peace diplomacy building on the two countries’ almost simultaneous experience of earth-quakes. Kofi Annan and his new adviser for the conflict, Alvaro de Soto, presented an elaborate peace plan for solving the conflict. It was continuously revised and Annan Plan V was finally put to a referendum on both sides of Cyprus in April 2004. Until that point the North, the Turkish side, had been seen as the most difficult and demanding community, but the support for the plan turned out to be very strong. For most of the time it had been assumed that the South, the Republic of Cyprus, always was in favour of a solution. However, in the referendum, the President of the Republic turned against the plan, and it was rejected by a clear majority of the Greek-Cypriot/Greek-Cypriotic community. It was a tough set-back, as most of the conditions for a favourable outcome seemed to be there: a reasonable proposition, support from the surrounding countries and EU. This is undoubtedly the closest this conflict has been to a peaceful settlement. It was a most discouraging moment and the Department’s mission ended. Still, there are many good ideas in the Annan Plan, many of which could be of use in this and other similar conflicts.”
— Peter Wallensteen, Professor Emeritus, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, and founder of this magazine
As Dogukan explains, when the unification plan was up for voting, Turkish Cypriots were demonstrating on the street in favour of the plan, but afterwards many of the young experienced the failed unification attempt as a trauma. In the aftermath of the fruitless unification attempt, a new bureaucratic division emerged as the southern part, The Republic of Cyprus joined the European Union. However, on the north side, your parent’s citizenship affects which passport you will get. Only some get European citizenship, those are considered privileged. Dogukan explains his view on the situation for the rest:
“They are being stripped of their rights to have an identity.”
Both students express indignation about the north side’s status as a de facto state. A state in which the privileged are granted EU citizenship by southern Cyprus and others at best receive a Turkish passport. When turning to the future, both Dogukan and Selim express a partly pessimistic view. Dogukan thinks that the economic situation combined with perishing belief in a conclusion to the Cypriot issue makes a lot of people leave the island. He explains:
“We are losing our hope on the solving of the Cyprus issue. So that’s why our younger generations are leaving.”
Regarding the conflict and the future, Dogukan wants Cyprus to become a federal republic where everybody, all communities, can live together. Even if neither of them expresses too much optimism in the present, both Dogukan and Selim have a strong desire for a better future and neither of them will leave Cyprus. As Selim formulates his thoughts:
“I do want this country to flourish, because it’s a diamond in the rough, it definitely could become a whole lot better.”
This conflict is a reminder of how the absence of violence does not need to imply an absence of conflict. Division can be in the form of borders, bureaucracy, or generations. Some forms may not be as visible as others, but all might cause problems. It seems as if this conflict must be solved with skilled diplomacy. An encouragement to us students and future mediations, to take Erdoğan ice skating if so needed for peace.
By: Simon Davidson (with support from the UF Travel Group)
Photography: UN Photo/Yutaka Nagata
