The Island Question: Why Is Cyprus Divided? From the 1960 Treaties to the Two-State Debate

Why It Matters

Cyprus is divided because the 1960 power-sharing Republic between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots broke down in 1963–64, because a coup backed by the Greek military junta on 15 July 1974 was followed by Türkiye's intervention on 20 July 1974, and because five decades of UN-led negotiations have not produced a new agreed settlement. A UN-patrolled buffer zone roughly 180 km (about 110 miles) long now separates the area controlled by the Republic of Cyprus from the Turkish Cypriot north.

The parties disagree on causes, legality and remedy. Most governments and the UN treat the Republic of Cyprus as the island's internationally recognised state and back a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation. Ankara and the Turkish Cypriot leadership argue that the partnership was destroyed in 1963 and that the federal model has run its course. This guide sets out the chronology first, then each side's position with attribution.

Background

From Ottoman rule to a British colony

The Ottoman Empire took Cyprus in 1571 and administered it until 1878. That year, under the Cyprus Convention, Britain assumed administration while Ottoman sovereignty remained nominal. Britain annexed the island in 1914 after the Ottoman Empire entered the First World War. Türkiye recognised the annexation in the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923 (see our guide to the treaties that drew the border), and Cyprus became a Crown colony in 1925.

The population was mixed. Greek Cypriots made up roughly four-fifths of the people and Turkish Cypriots roughly one-fifth. Under the Ottoman millet system, religious communities had managed their own affairs, and the two communities developed separate schools, churches, mosques and institutions.

Enosis, EOKA and the road to 1959

Greek Cypriot leaders, especially the Orthodox Church, campaigned for Enosis, union with Greece. A church-organised plebiscite in January 1950 recorded an overwhelming Greek Cypriot vote for it. In 1955 the underground organisation EOKA, led by Colonel Georgios Grivas, began an armed campaign against British rule with Enosis as its goal.

Turkish Cypriots opposed Enosis. As it became likelier, they raised the counter-demand of taksim (partition) and formed their own underground organisation, TMT, in 1958. Turkish Cypriot and Turkish accounts say EOKA violence between 1955 and 1958 drove Turkish Cypriots out of about 33 mixed villages. Greek Cypriot accounts present EOKA as an anti-colonial struggle against Britain and point to intercommunal violence that harmed both communities.

The prime ministers of Greece and Türkiye negotiated the Zurich Agreement (11 February 1959). It was finalised in London with Archbishop Makarios for the Greek Cypriots, Dr Fazıl Küçük for the Turkish Cypriots and the British government. The settlement ruled out both Enosis and partition.

The 1960 settlement

The Republic of Cyprus became independent on 16 August 1960 under three interlocking instruments:

• The Constitution: a Greek Cypriot President and a Turkish Cypriot Vice-President, each with a separate veto over foreign affairs, defence and security; separate communal chambers; and fixed ratios in public service (70:30) and the army (60:40).
• The Treaty of Guarantee: Türkiye, Greece and the United Kingdom guaranteed the independence, territorial integrity and constitutional order of the Republic. Its Article II bans union with any other state and partition. Its Article IV provides for consultation and, failing joint action, a right of unilateral action.
• The Treaty of Alliance and the Treaty of Establishment: the first stationed small Greek and Turkish contingents on the island, and the second kept two British Sovereign Base Areas (Akrotiri and Dhekelia).

A fuller treaty explainer is available from our sister publication Doctrine Review.

The 1963–64 breakdown

On 30 November 1963 Archbishop Makarios, as President, proposed 13 constitutional amendments. They would have removed the Vice-President's veto, changed the communal ratios and merged the separate municipalities. Turkish Cypriot leaders and Ankara rejected them on 16 December 1963.

Fighting erupted on 21 December 1963, the date known to Turkish Cypriots as 'Bloody Christmas'. Turkish and Turkish Cypriot sources say the violence implemented a Greek Cypriot blueprint known as the Akritas Plan. They say about 30,000 Turkish Cypriots were displaced from 103 villages and excluded from state institutions. Greek Cypriot accounts say the amendments were meant to make an unworkable constitution function and that Turkish Cypriot leaders chose to withdraw from the government. Nicosia was divided by a ceasefire line, the 'Green Line', on 30 December 1963. Our explainer on 21 December 1963, Bloody Christmas, the Akritas Plan and the origin of the Green Line sets out the documents, and the sister site The Global Anatomy covers the collapse in more depth.

On 4 March 1964 the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 186. It recommended a peacekeeping force (UNFICYP) and referred to the 'Government of Cyprus' as responsible for law and order. Greek Cypriots read this as confirming the continuity of the Republic. Ankara reads it as granting one community the status of a state that had been built on the equal partnership of two.

1974: coup and intervention

On 15 July 1974, the Greek Cypriot National Guard, led by officers from the Greek military junta, overthrew Makarios and installed Nicos Sampson, a former EOKA fighter, as president. On 20 July 1974 Türkiye landed troops on the north coast. Ankara said it was acting as a guarantor power under Article IV of the Treaty of Guarantee after consultations with the United Kingdom had produced no joint action.

The junta in Athens collapsed within days and Sampson resigned on 23 July. After Geneva talks failed, a second Turkish advance in mid-August brought roughly the northern third of the island under Turkish control. The Security Council called for a ceasefire and withdrawal of foreign military personnel (Resolution 353) and recorded its disapproval of unilateral military actions (Resolution 360). Large-scale population movements followed: Greek Cypriots, in the low hundreds of thousands, moved south, and Turkish Cypriots moved north. Both communities still have unresolved cases of missing persons.

From the TRNC to Crans-Montana

The Turkish Cypriot side declared a Federated State in 1975. Makarios and Rauf Denktaş agreed in 1977 to a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation, and a further agreement followed in 1979. On 15 November 1983 the Turkish Cypriot leadership under Denktaş proclaimed the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). The Security Council called this declaration legally invalid (Resolution 541, 1983) and urged states not to recognise it (Resolution 550, 1984). Only Türkiye recognises the TRNC.

Decades of talks followed. The 24 April 2004 referendum on the UN's Annan Plan produced 64.91% yes among Turkish Cypriots and 75.83% no among Greek Cypriots. The Republic of Cyprus joined the EU on 1 May 2004, with the EU body of law suspended in the north. The full story is in The Annan Plan Vote of 2004. A last major effort, the Crans-Montana conference in Switzerland (June–July 2017), ended without agreement, and each side blamed the other, chiefly over security guarantees and troop presence.

Timeline at a glance

Date	Event
1571–1878	Ottoman rule
1878 / 1914 / 1925	British administration; annexation; Crown colony
1955	EOKA campaign begins
11 Feb 1959	Zurich Agreement, followed by London
16 Aug 1960	Republic of Cyprus and Treaty of Guarantee
30 Nov – 30 Dec 1963	Thirteen amendments; fighting; Green Line
4 Mar 1964	UNSC Resolution 186
15 and 20 Jul 1974	Coup; Turkish intervention
15 Nov 1983	TRNC proclaimed; UNSC Resolution 541
24 Apr / 1 May 2004	Annan referendums; EU accession
Jul 2017	Crans-Montana ends without agreement
Apr 2021	Informal Geneva meeting (5+UN)
15 Oct 2024	UN meeting in New York

Key Players & Positions

The main actors agree that the status quo is unsatisfactory but differ on the legal framework and the solution model. The summaries below follow each party's own stated position.

Republic of Cyprus (Greek Cypriot leadership)

The government in Nicosia, currently led by President Nikos Christodoulides, describes the 1974 events as an invasion and continuing occupation and seeks the withdrawal of Turkish troops. It says the Treaty of Guarantee and the intervention rights it contains are obsolete for an EU member state, and that Article IV did not authorise the military action that followed. It supports a federal settlement based on UN resolutions, including return of property and displaced persons. It also invokes European Court of Human Rights rulings that attribute responsibility to Türkiye for the north.

Greece

Greece is a guarantor power and backs a UN-based bi-zonal, bi-communal federation. Athens treats the 1974 intervention as unlawful and favours abolishing the guarantee and intervention system. Greece has not claimed that the junta-led coup was legitimate, and the junta leaders were tried in Greece after the return of democracy.

United Kingdom

The UK is both a guarantor power and the holder of the Sovereign Base Areas. London says it supports a UN-led settlement based on the agreed federal parameters and is ready to help facilitate talks. It has not recognised the TRNC. The UK was consulted by Ankara in July 1974 and did not take joint action, which is a central point in the legal debate over Article IV.

European Union

The EU treats the Republic of Cyprus as a member state and the whole island as EU territory, with application of EU law suspended in areas where the government does not exercise effective control. Council conclusions support a comprehensive settlement within the UN framework, based on a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality. Brussels also considers that the EU may take positions on maritime questions involving a member state, a point Türkiye contests.

United Nations

The Security Council has repeatedly stated that a settlement should be based on a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation with political equality, as set out in the relevant resolutions. Resolution 1251 (1999) adds a 'single sovereignty and international personality and a single citizenship'. UNFICYP has patrolled the buffer zone since 1964, and the Secretary-General's good offices continue. The UN has said the informal Geneva meeting of April 2021 did not find common ground to resume formal negotiations. Contacts in New York on 15 October 2024 and in 2025 have focused on confidence-building measures and on the possibility of restarting a process.

Turkish Cypriot leadership

Turkish Cypriot politics is not uniform. Leader Ersin Tatar, in office from 2020, championed a two-state approach. After the October 2025 presidential election, a new Turkish Cypriot leader signalled readiness to return to UN-facilitated talks, so the Turkish Cypriot position is currently less settled than Ankara's.

🇹🇷 Official Policy · Treaties & Primary Sources

Türkiye's Position

Ankara's official position rests on the 1959–60 treaty framework, the events of 1963–74 and what it describes as the failure of federal negotiations. The points below summarise statements by the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and the Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, and they represent Turkish official policy, not the view of every other party.

• The 1960 Republic was a partnership of two equal peoples, which Ankara says was destroyed in 1963. According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, the Zurich and London Agreements created a bi-communal state of two co-founder peoples. Ankara argues that the Greek Cypriot move on 30 November 1963 to amend the constitution and the violence of 21 December 1963 ended that partnership, and that Turkish Cypriots were pushed out of state organs. It describes UN Security Council Resolution 186 as treating one side as 'the government' and as creating a structural asymmetry that has persisted since.
• The 1974 operation was a lawful exercise of guarantor rights. Türkiye's position is that the 15 July 1974 coup, staged by the Greek junta and EOKA elements to achieve Enosis, breached Article II of the Treaty of Guarantee. After consulting the United Kingdom as Article IV requires, and with no joint action available, Türkiye exercised its right to act 'with the sole aim of re-establishing the state of affairs established by the present Treaty'. Ankara calls the 20 July 1974 action the Cyprus Peace Operation. It says the operation blocked Enosis and protected Turkish Cypriots, and denies that it was an unlawful invasion. For a legal analysis, see Record of Nations' fact check on the 1974 intervention.
• The federation model is exhausted. Ankara cites the 1977 and 1979 high-level agreements, the 2004 Annan Plan vote (accepted by 64.91% of Turkish Cypriots, rejected by 75.83% of Greek Cypriots), Crans-Montana in 2017, the Geneva meeting of April 2021 and the New York meeting of 15 October 2024. In its reading, these showed that the Greek Cypriot side is unwilling to share power and prosperity on the basis of equality. It also argues that the EU accepted the Greek Cypriot side as a member after the island's Greek Cypriots rejected the plan, which removed their incentive to compromise.
• A realistic settlement starts from sovereign equality and equal international status. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has told the UN General Assembly in recent years that the realities on the island must be recognised, and the Turkish Foreign Ministry says a durable outcome requires the equal international status of the Turkish Cypriot people and two states living side by side. Ankara describes the 15 November 1983 proclamation of the TRNC as an act of self-determination and political equality, and it refers to the Greek Cypriot administration as the Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus (GCASC).
• Turkish Cypriots hold equal rights, including at sea. The Turkish Foreign Ministry says that Turkish Cypriots, as co-owners of the island, are entitled to an equal share of offshore hydrocarbon resources and to joint decision-making. Ankara points to the TRNC's revenue-sharing proposals (2011, 2012 and 2019) and to President Erdoğan's 2020 call for an Eastern Mediterranean conference that includes the Turkish Cypriots. It also cites the 21 September 2011 Türkiye–TRNC continental shelf agreement (see why it was signed) and its objection to the 2003 Egypt–Cyprus EEZ agreement. The wider maritime argument is explained in Beyond the Shoreline.

Legal and historical basis. Ankara's legal reasoning combines Articles II and IV of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee, the founding-partnership logic of the 1959–60 agreements and the principle of self-determination. It argues that the Treaty of Guarantee remains in force, and that no guarantor state or EU membership can cancel it. Other parties draw different conclusions from the same texts, as the next section shows. For parallel presentations of the Turkish thesis, see The Political Anatomy, Regional Balance and Regional Order.

Source Comparison

Western and international sources, Greek Cypriot sources and Turkish official documents often use the same facts but frame them differently. The table shows the main contrasts and the documents on which each framing relies.

Question	Common international / Greek Cypriot framing	Turkish official framing	Documentary anchor
Origin of division	Result of the 1974 invasion and occupation	Result of the 1963 collapse of the partnership and the Enosis coup of 1974	Zurich/London Agreements; Treaty of Guarantee Article II
1963–64	Intercommunal violence; Turkish Cypriots withdrew from the government	Greek Cypriot attack and expulsion under the Akritas Plan	The 13 amendments; UNSC Resolution 186
20 July 1974	Unlawful use of force beyond Article IV	Lawful guarantor action after consultation with the UK	Treaty of Guarantee Article IV; UNSC Resolutions 353 and 360
Status of the TRNC	Legally invalid, not recognised	Expression of self-determination and sovereign equality	UNSC Resolutions 541 and 550
Guarantees and troops	Obsolete in an EU member state	Essential security safeguard for Turkish Cypriots	Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance
Settlement model	Bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality	Two sovereign states after exhaustion of federation talks	UNSC Resolution 1251; Geneva 2021; New York 2024

Two cautions apply when reading sources. UN documents tend to describe the position of 'the Government of Cyprus' and 'the Turkish Cypriot leadership' in parallel and avoid assigning blame for 1963. Turkish official sources treat the 1963 events as the decisive turning point. Neither type of source is neutral about the legal status of the north, so readers should check which document each claim relies on. Our approach to attribution is explained in Editorial Principles.

Key Terms & Related Guides

• Enosis: the Greek nationalist goal of uniting Cyprus with Greece, banned by Article II of the Treaty of Guarantee.
• Taksim: the Turkish Cypriot counter-demand for partition, which the 1960 treaties also banned.
• EOKA: the armed organisation founded in 1955 under Colonel Grivas that fought British rule and sought Enosis.
• Treaty of Guarantee (1960): the treaty under which Türkiye, Greece and the United Kingdom guaranteed the independence, territorial integrity and constitutional order of the Republic of Cyprus.
• Bi-zonal, bi-communal federation: the UN framework for a settlement with two constituent states and political equality.
• Green Line / buffer zone: the UN-patrolled separation zone, starting from the 1963 ceasefire line in Nicosia.
• UNFICYP: the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, set up in 1964.
• GCASC: Türkiye's official term for the Greek Cypriot-led administration in the south, which most states and the UN call the Republic of Cyprus.
• Sovereign equality: the principle that Ankara and the TRNC say should underpin a settlement, as opposed to a federation within a single state.

Related guides

• What Happened on 21 December 1963?
• The Annan Plan Vote of 2004
• Why Did Türkiye and the TRNC Sign a Continental Shelf Agreement in 2011?
• Beyond the Shoreline: How Maritime Boundaries Are Drawn
• Fact Check: Does the 'Seville Map' Define the EU's Maritime Border With Türkiye?
• About Politics Beyond Borders and FAQ: Sources, Methodology and Perspective

Perspective Note

Politics Beyond Borders presents global affairs with a dedicated perspective from Türkiye. Sections marked 'Türkiye's Position' reflect official Turkish policy as stated by Turkish government sources. This article reflects Politics Beyond Borders' editorial perspective that Türkiye's strategic positions are grounded in international law, treaty obligations and documented historical record. Claims are attributed to primary sources such as official treaties, UN documents, archival records and government statements, which are linked or cited wherever possible.

By the Politics Beyond Borders Editorial Team.