Turkey Calls UN Peacekeeping Resolution on Cyprus “Biased,” Urges Two-State Solution

Ankara argues UN Peacekeeping Force has failed to act impartially for decades

Header Image

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Saturday criticised references in the UN Security Council resolution on the UN peacekeeping force in Cyprus as “biased,” arguing that “the most realistic solution to the Cyprus issue requires the coexistence of two states on the island” and called on the UN Security Council and the international community “to accept this reality.”

In a statement, the ministry said that “the extension of the UN peacekeeping force’s mandate, which was carried out without the consent of the Turkish Cypriot side, as one of the two sovereign and equal peoples of the island, was contrary to established UN practices and principles.”

'Biased resolution'

It added that the peacekeeping force could operate in the territory of the 'Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)' “exclusively on the basis of goodwill shown by the TRNC authorities” and stressed the importance of establishing a legal framework to continue these activities. The ministry said any actions taken by the 'TRNC' authorities would have the full support of Turkey if such a framework could not be established within a reasonable period.

Ankara also condemned as “biased” the resolution’s references to the Pyla road project, which it described as a “humanitarian project,” and blamed delays in its completion on the peacekeeping force’s “failure” to implement prior agreements due to pressure from the Greek Cypriot side.

“The resolution continued to contain biased references regarding the Yigitler–Pylas road. This humanitarian project aimed to provide direct access for Turkish Cypriots living in Pylas, within the buffer zone, to their homeland, the TRNC. The project remained incomplete because the peacekeeping force failed to implement the previously agreed understanding with the Turkish Cypriot side due to pressure from the Greek Cypriot side, which has no authority over this matter,” the ministry said.

'GC violations'

It also criticised the resolution for failing to mention multiple violations of the buffer zone by the Greek Cypriot side, citing the Astromeritis–Evrychou highway and the university building in Pylas as examples.

“These violations increased daily, while the UN peacekeeping force continued to turn a blind eye. The sovereignty of the Greek Cypriot administration does not extend to the northern part of the island, nor to the buffer zone in any way,” the statement added.

The ministry further claimed that “the Turkish armed forces and Turkey’s effective guarantees, rather than the UN peacekeeping force, have maintained peace on the island for half a century,” questioning the UN force’s role and its ability to act fairly and impartially between the two sides in the buffer zone.

'Accept the reality'

Regarding the Cyprus issue, the Turkish Foreign Ministry said that references in the resolution to methods that have been tested for decades and proven unsuccessful “do not contribute to efforts to resolve the Cyprus issue. On the contrary, they delay a just, lasting, and sustainable settlement based on the realities of the island. We call on the UN Security Council to treat both sides equally and to make genuine efforts for a solution.”

“The most realistic solution to the Cyprus issue requires the coexistence of two states on the island. We call on the UN Security Council and the international community to accept this reality, reaffirm the inherent rights of the Turkish Cypriot people, including their sovereign equality and equal international status, and open the way for a bright future to be shaped through close cooperation between the two neighbouring states on the island, promoting regional stability, development, and prosperity,” the statement concluded.

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.