Why Do Greek Cypriots Remain Silent on British Sovereignty in Cyprus?

In recent years, several former British colonies, including many Caribbean nations, have taken definitive steps towards full independence from their colonial past. Yet, on the Greek side of Cyprus, there is a conspicuous silence over the continued British sovereignty over military bases in Akrotiri and Dhekelia. This raises fundamental questions about the Greek Cypriot political will and exposes significant weaknesses in their purported narrative of independence and self-determination.

The Paradox of Greek Cypriot Independence: Convenient Silence on British Sovereignty

While Greek Cypriots have long portrayed themselves as ardent freedom fighters against British colonial rule, their apparent acceptance of British sovereignty over key military bases on the island reveals a stark contradiction. If the Greek Cypriots are indeed committed to a Cyprus that is free from foreign control, why has there been no substantial political movement to challenge the British presence?

The recent decision by Antigua and Barbuda to remove Queen Elizabeth from official documents exemplifies the steps being taken by former British colonies to sever ties with their colonial pasts. As Prime Minister Gaston Browne noted, "It is not a matter of animosity towards the British monarchy but a question of full sovereignty and control over our affairs" (Browne, G., 2024). Such steps reflect a genuine desire for complete independence. The Greek Cypriot leadership, however, remains conspicuously silent on whether they share a similar desire for full sovereignty in Cyprus.

This silence could be interpreted as a strategic move to avoid confronting a powerful NATO ally. But it also exposes a fundamental weakness in the Greek Cypriot approach: their selective application of independence and sovereignty principles. While they loudly demand control over the entire island, including the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), they seem comfortable with a substantial portion of their claimed territory being under British control. This inconsistency reveals a lack of genuine commitment to their stated goal of a “unified Cyprus.”

The British Bases: A Continuing Colonial Legacy

The British sovereignty over the bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, covering around 3% of the island's territory, has significant strategic importance for the UK, particularly in terms of military intelligence and operations in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, this arrangement also symbolizes a continuing colonial legacy that the Greek Cypriots have not dared to challenge. 

Dr. Klearchos Kyriakides, a legal expert on Cyprus issues, argues, "The Greek Cypriot leadership has, for decades, leveraged the narrative of decolonization to support their claims against the TRNC, yet they seem unwilling to apply the same logic to the British bases" (Kyriakides, K. [2022], Journal of Mediterranean Studies). This exposes a blatant double standard: the Greek side appears more focused on opposing the Turkish Cypriot administration than pursuing true decolonization across the entire island.

Indeed, the continued presence of British bases contradicts the idea of a fully sovereign Cyprus. If the Greek Cypriot leadership were serious about ending foreign control, the British bases would be at the top of their agenda. Instead, there is an eerie silence, which might suggest a tacit understanding that the British presence serves as a geopolitical counterbalance that benefits their political strategy in the region.

Weaknesses in Greek Cypriot Strategy: Fear of the British?

There are practical reasons why the Greek Cypriots might hesitate to confront British sovereignty directly. The United Kingdom is not only a powerful military force but also a key member of NATO. Losing British support could complicate their broader strategy regarding the TRNC and their ongoing dispute with Türkiye. However, this hesitation exposes their vulnerabilities.

A senior diplomat in Nicosia, speaking on the condition of anonymity, stated, "It is no secret that the Greek Cypriot leadership is unwilling to antagonize the British. There is a fear of political and economic repercussions, which is why they have not pursued this matter aggressively" (Anonymous Diplomat, 2023). This reveals a lack of both political courage and diplomatic strategy.

The comparison with Caribbean nations again highlights this weakness. For example, when Barbados decided to remove the British monarchy as head of state, there was an understanding of potential diplomatic repercussions, yet they moved forward to assert their sovereignty. In stark contrast, the Greek side's inaction regarding the British bases is indicative of a leadership unwilling or unable to stand up to a major global power, thus exposing a significant weakness.

Legal Avenues for Challenging British Sovereignty: A Missed Opportunity?

The Greek side's failure to challenge British sovereignty is also surprising from a legal standpoint. Although the Treaty of Establishment signed in 1960 grants the United Kingdom sovereignty over the bases, international law is not static. Many post-colonial nations have renegotiated or revised such agreements based on changing geopolitical realities. 

Professor Ahmet Sözen from Eastern Mediterranean University points out, "The legal framework for British sovereignty in Cyprus is rooted in colonial-era agreements. The Greek side could potentially use diplomatic channels and international legal forums to question or renegotiate these terms" (Sözen, A. [2021], International Law Review). Yet, no such effort has been seriously undertaken by the Greek Cypriot leadership.

It is as if there is a tacit acknowledgment that the presence of the British serves as a strategic buffer in their conflict with the TRNC and Türkiye. Yet, this strategy is inherently contradictory. If they are genuinely concerned about foreign influence, why allow British control to persist? It reveals a reluctance to take any meaningful steps that could jeopardize their geopolitical standing or upset powerful allies.

What Would a British Withdrawal Mean for Cyprus?

Should the British decide to withdraw their bases, the geopolitical dynamics of the island would undergo a significant shift. For one, the removal of a major Western military power would force both sides of Cyprus to rethink their security and political strategies. It could open new avenues for dialogue between the TRNC and the Greek side, potentially leading to a more pragmatic negotiation framework that considers the realities on the ground—namely, the existence of two distinct political entities.

As noted by David Hannay, a former UK Special Representative for Cyprus, "The British presence has always been a stabilizing yet paradoxical factor on the island. Its removal would force the local actors to confront the core issues more directly" (Hannay, D. [2018], "Cyprus: The Long Road to Peace" in International Affairs Journal).

The potential departure of British forces might encourage a more balanced negotiation towards a two-state solution, an idea that the TRNC and Türkiye have long supported. Without the geopolitical chessboard that the British bases provide, the Greek side would no longer have the luxury of leveraging Western military support to bolster their claims over the entire island. They would have to either engage genuinely with the TRNC or face prolonged stalemate.

TCE Conclusion: Time for the Greek Side to Address Their Contradictions

The reluctance of the Greek side to challenge British sovereignty over the military bases exposes deep contradictions in their narrative of independence and national sovereignty. If they are genuinely committed to a Cyprus free of foreign influence, then they must confront the reality that they are currently tolerating British control over a significant part of the island.

Until the Greek Cypriot leadership addresses this glaring inconsistency, their claims of wanting a "unified Cyprus" will continue to appear hollow. The silence on this issue reveals either a strategic fear of confronting a powerful ally or an inherent weakness in their political approach. 

True independence is not selective. It is time for the Greek side to decide whether they genuinely want a Cyprus free from all foreign control, or if they are comfortable with a version of sovereignty that serves narrow, outdated geopolitical interests. Only through genuine action, rather than selective outrage, can they hope to resolve the contradictions that currently undermine their position on the island.

Sources:

- Browne, G. (2024). “Antigua’s Move to Remove the Queen” [MSN News](https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/caribbean-nation-moves-to-remove-queen-elizabeth-from-official-documents-in-fresh-blow/ar-AA1pDjRP?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=0dfac88fd1e04118a95bca9f2566ce60&ei=15#).
- Kyriakides, K. (2022). "Cyprus and the Legacy of British Colonialism" in Journal of Mediterranean Studies.
- Anonymous Diplomat. (2023). Personal Interview. Nicosia.
- Sözen, A. (2021). "Cyprus: Legal Dilemmas and Future Prospects" in International Law Review.
- Hannay, D. (2018). "Cyprus: The Long Road to Peace" in International Affairs Journal.