Entering the EU is a complex process that has many checkpoints and hoops to jump through. How did Cyprus manage to fill it with a big chunk of territory being in revolt, wanting to secede and gain independence?
In: Other
The conflict is mostly cold. The seccession already happened in 1983 before the EU existed, and they had no de-facto control over half of the island.
What joined the EU is only the republic Cyprus, the inofficial, but de-facto stable part North Cyprus wasn’t involved in joining the EU.
The conflict isn’t resolved, but it’s not instable, and there are actually trade contacts and communication between both sides, so in Realpolitik terms they are already two countries
Governments don’t just shut down when there is a revolt. In the US, we had half the country try to secede. The US government continued to function. We passed laws, negotiated treaties, had elections, did all the things we were doing before.
The Cypriot government did the same thing: continued to function as a government does.
Very simple.
The Republic of Cyprus, that is officially most of the island except the British territories, joined the EU as a whole.
A part of the Republic is under Turkish occupation, though, and the Republic has no actual control over it. So when the Republic joined the EU it was specified that the EU laws are suspended on the uncontrolled territories until the conflict is resolved. So while the whole country joined the EU, it only actually “works” in the territory that is actually controlled by the country.
And while joining the EU is indeed a complex process, it doesn’t actually *require* for the country to control the whole territory, nor it creates any difficulties that are impossible to overcome. Unlike, say, joining the Schengen area. Since it doesn’t have any border control within the area, you can’t really join Schengen if you don’t control your own borders. Otherwise anyone could enter the area freely through the uncontrolled territory, which is something that’s not allowed, obviously.
The process of joining EU is complex and have many checkpoints but it is not rigid. If there are problems at any points it is possible to negotiate and find a suitable solution for both parties. This is what Cyprus did and they were allowed to join the EU with laws only applying in the southern region. Turkey already had a customs union with the EU and have been in negotiations to join for a long time now. If Turkey is to join the EU, as were hoped for when Cyprus joined, then the division between the two regions would become less apparent. The EU was a major reason why the relations in Ireland had improved so much that it ended the troubles. And a lot of similar independence movements have been severely slowed down after the countries joined the EU. So there is a big chance that a Turkish EU membership would help resolve the situation in Cyprus.
Basically only the European half got in. The turkish half is widely acknowledged to be under illegal occupation and would also be included if it came under control of the south government but until that happens they pretend it’s not there and someone else’s problem.
First, the territory is not in revolt or wanting to secede. It is a part of the country occupied by Turkey, and de facto administered by it in all but name, supposedly in the name of the Turkish community in the island. Most of said community has meanwhile migrated abroad, and replaced with subsidized settlers from Turkey, but I digress.. The answer to your question is the threat of Greece’s veto.
A country’s accession in the EU can be vetoed by any existing Member-State. The 2004 Enlargement in the former Eastern bloc was seen as an extremely important move for EU security at a time when Russia was starting to recover from the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Greece threatened to veto the whole enlargement round unless Cyprus is added to the candidate member-states. Since all the big countries wanted to go through with the engagement asap, they were more willing to overlook those institutional problems of Cyprus for the sake of the big picture.
The conflict on the island may be frozen due to military guarantees, but the Cyprus dispute is part of the wider Greece-Turkey dispute which was, and still is, ongoing and subject to flare ups. By including Cyprus in the EU, Greece wanted to torpedo any Turkish scheme for the unilateral annexation of the northern part of the island, by making it de jure EU territory. It was a victory for Greek diplomacy at the time, but the matter still lingers unfortunately. In any case your understanding is right. Due to these problems, if the opportunity had not appeared in the early 00s, Cyprus would probably never be admitted in the EU via a standalone application.
Because none of that is true?
Some explanations here but the real reason is that Greece had much more say in the early 00s and basically pulled its weight to force Cyprus in or else they would veto any other country joining.
I see people keep saying “Turkey’s occupation” in the comments. These people know nothing, don’t bother.
Latest Answers