On October 30 2024, the President of the United States met with President Nikos Christodoulides of the Republic of Cyprus at the White House. It was the first official visit of a Cypriot leader since 1996. The visit had a symbolic connotation since 2024 marks 50 years of illegal Turkish occupation of North Cyprus. President Christodoulides and President Biden held a similar position regarding the subject of Cyprus, reaffirming the position of the U.S. as a reliable and strategic partner. However, with the recent elections in the U.S, there might be some different views coming from Washington. Could Trump’s return also herald the revival of the Acheson plan initially mooted decades ago, or are we heading towards new policies that might bring a realistic solution to the occupation of Cyprus?
What exactly was the Acheson plan? In 1964, ten years before the invasion of Cyprus, Turkey was already threatening an invasion, citing concerns about the proposed ideas of uniting Cyprus with Greece. Dean Acheson served as the 51st U.S. Secretary of State, spearheading foreign policy for the Truman administration from 1949 to 1953.
Years later, declassified CIA documents revealed that Acheson was consulted as a private citizen on the Cyprus problem, conducting talks with representatives of the Greek and Turkish government in Geneva. His proposed plan(s) were divided into two parts:
A. In return for Turkish agreement to a potential unification between Greece and Cyprus, both countries would have to agree to cede a portion of the island to Turkey, in full sovereignty, to use as a military base. In addition, Turkish-Cypriot citizens would have full protection and be treated as legitimate citizens by the central authority of the island. The plan was quickly rejected by Greece as any Turkish sovereignty in Cyprus was off the table.
B. Given disagreement on the first plan, Acheson suggested a modified plan that would have seen Turkey leasing a part of the island for 50 years to be turned into a military base. Again; the plan was rejected as politically infeasible by the Greek side.
Though the plan itself was not a success, yet again the plan structure has resurfaced in 2024, and has been seen more favourably from the Turkish side. A modernized version of it would suggest even more military presence in the occupied region of northern Cyprus which would result in an unbalance of power on the island. For foreign policy analysts like Dr. Mehmet Uğur Ekinci, this would be ideal but just for Turkey. With Ekinci stating “Revisiting the Acheson Plan offers a pragmatic approach to overcome the diplomatic impasse by directly addressing Türkiye's security needs while respecting the rights of the Turkish Cypriot people”.
It is not a sign of goodwill in finding a solution for Cyprus, when the Turkish argument focuses exclusively on their own side. This is evidenced by the aggressive stance that the Turkish government practices under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. A question arises: if a modernized version of the Acheson plan is not a practical solution for the Cyprus dispute, then why is it resurfacing in 2024?
The Acheson plan is circulating solely because it is a version that benefits only Turkey and with the recent re-election of Donald Trump, there is a sense of opportunism coming out of the Turkish side. Even though the Trump administration has previously sanctioned and criticized Turkey for their purchase of Russian S-400 missile systems, Erdoğan might focus on renegotiating several trade deals and bring out on the table the case of Cyprus to seek more favorable support on an international level.
With that being said, I see two major problems with this approach. First, for the past few years, Turkey has been trying to balance gaining as much influence as possible with both Russia and the U.S. That is something that Trump experienced first-hand and it is very unlikely that he forgot about the disingenuous acts of Erdoğan. The other main problem is the isolationism that Trump has repeatedly focused on in his campaign. Although the country won’t be completely absent internationally, Turkey’s current optimistic expectations are not politically sensible.
In the end, the Acheson plan itself is not achievable. What needs to be done right now is for the European Union to take advantage of the isolationist policies of Donald Trump and the political delusions of Erdoğan, and adopt a clear and assertive position.
The French President Emmanuel Macron commented last week that Europe can’t be the world’s “herbivore” anymore following Donald Trump’s re-election. It needs to become an “omnivore” instead, at the least.
The Cyprus problem is the perfect opportunity to demonstrate that new turning point. A collective response against Turkey and a commitment towards Cyprus is a must for a Europe which wants to lead in its own backyard. This manoeuvre will show that the U.S. is not needed in matters concerning Europe and Macron’s gamble might pay off. We are focusing on the failing state of Ukraine which is neither an EU or NATO member and we are brushing away our allies that are threatened by a regime that has zero respect for international law. Do we want an actual solution for Cyprus? Then that should come from Europe.
Image: The National Federation of Cypriots in the UK
No image changes made.
Comments