Ankara rejects EU’s ‘illegal’ assessment of Cyprus and makes progress in relations

In a major diplomatic response, Turkey’s Foreign Ministry publicly rejected the European Commission’s 2024 Enlargement Strategy and Country Report on Turkey, saying the report’s assessments were unfair and did not reflect the realities on the ground.

The report, published on Wednesday, sparked a new wave of controversy, especially around the assessment of Turkey’s political criteria and internal dynamics.

In an official statement, the Foreign Office expressed disappointment at what it called the “unrealistic and illegitimate” views set out in the EU report, particularly in relation to complex issues related to the Cyprus issue.

The ministry criticized the report for focusing heavily on the position of Greece and the Greek Cypriot administration, which Türkiye claims ignores its legitimate interests and rights, as well as the position of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC).

Turkish officials stressed that the report recognizes Turkey’s constructive role in the Eastern Mediterranean and its positive relations with Greece. However, they argue that these achievements are undermined by the report’s failure to address Turkey’s legitimate security concerns, particularly in the context of the Cyprus dispute, which they argue should be resolved solely through negotiations involving the parties directly involved in the dispute. island.

The Foreign Ministry emphasized that EU statements regarding Cyprus do not contribute to settlement efforts. They stressed that this issue must be resolved through a negotiation process involving the island’s two communities, the three guarantor powers and the United Nations.

The island of Cyprus has been a point of contention for decades, with the ongoing dispute between the Greek Cypriot community and the Turkish Cypriot community affecting not only the island itself, but also relations between Turkey and the EU.

The roots of the conflict lie in the 1960s, after the island gained independence from British rule. Tensions between the two communities escalated, culminating in the Greek Cypriot coup d’état in 1974 and subsequent Turkish military intervention. This led to the de facto division of the island into the Republic of Cyprus (recognized internationally, but controlling only the south) and the TRNC (recognized only by Turkey).

The EU’s involvement further complicated the situation. When the Republic of Cyprus applied for EU membership in 1990, Türkiye objected, citing an unresolved dispute. Despite this, the EU admitted Cyprus in 2004, but with a caveat: the North would be deprived of the benefits of membership until a reunification agreement was reached.

Numerous attempts have been made to find a solution to the Cyprus dispute, including UN-backed negotiations and negotiations between the two communities. However, no lasting solution was reached.

Revaluation of connections

On the other hand, emphasizing the geopolitical importance of Turkey against the backdrop of ongoing global problems, the Foreign Ministry advocated a reassessment Turkey-EU relations. They expressed hope that the EU would take a more constructive approach, recognizing Turkey’s potential as a partner rather than viewing it through the lens of historical grievances.

The ministry stressed that Turkey’s political will to strengthen bilateral relations is unshakable and called on the EU to take tangible measures that reflect this commitment.

Speaking at the report’s launch, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell called Turkey an “important” player in regional dynamics, signaling growing recognition within the EU of Turkey’s strategic importance.

The report praises Turkey for its handling of migration issues, especially for hosting some 3.6 million refugees from Syria, as well as its vigorous efforts to combat terrorism.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry’s assessment of the report also highlighted the urgent need for a new look at Türkiye-EU relations that goes beyond the limitations of the past.

It argues that genuine progress in the relationship depends on the EU’s willingness to take a more strategic approach, especially regarding the implementation of previously agreed recommendations without additional preconditions.

Turkey’s relations with the European project began in 1959 with the signing of the Ankara Agreement. This agreement aimed at gradual economic integration between Turkey and the European Economic Community (EEC), the predecessor of the EU. This marked the beginning of a long-term vision for rapprochement and potential future membership of the country.

Turkey’s aspirations took a concrete step forward in 1999 when it was granted official candidate status for full EU membership. The decision was greeted with both enthusiasm and caution in the EU, reflecting the controversial nature of integration for a large and culturally diverse nation like Turkey.

Official accession negotiations began in 2005 during the reign of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), which still governs the country. Those talks included a comprehensive assessment of Turkey’s compliance with EU norms, the vast body of laws, regulations and policies that form the bloc’s core. This process involved opening and then temporarily closing individual chapters, each representing a specific policy area, once established criteria had been met.

However, the path to membership was not easy. Progress in negotiations has been slow. By 2016, only 16 of 35 branches were open and only one was temporarily closed.

By 2018, accession negotiations had stalled. The EU has expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of progress on key issues, while Türkiye has criticized what it perceives as double standards and a lack of commitment from the EU. This led to a virtual suspension of the accession process, leaving the future of Turkey’s EU membership in a state of uncertainty.

Despite the stalled negotiations, relations between the bloc and Turkey remain multifaceted. Both sides continue to cooperate on various issues of mutual interest. This ongoing interaction, although not directly related to the entry process, demonstrates the intertwined nature of their relationship.