Cyprus is once again searching for a path to peace. A former negotiator warns: the problem is not where they are looking for it

The latest UN initiative to resolve the Cyprus conflict is meant to breathe new life into the stalled peace process. However, former Turkish Cypriot negotiator Ozdil Nami believes the main threat does not lie in the differences between the sides, but in the very design of the future talks.

Against the backdrop of the visit by UN Special Envoy Maria Angela Holguin and the renewed diplomatic activity of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Nami issued a surprising warning: Cyprus risks stepping on the same rake once again.

The problem is not the content, but the method

The reason for concern was media reports about new ideas for organizing the negotiation process.

According to Nami, there is no longer any need to argue about the substance of a future agreement.

Many key agreements already exist. The question is how to bring the process to an end.

The former negotiator recalls the days of the Annan Plan, when talks were held under clear rules: there was a timetable, an arbitration mechanism in case of deadlock, and a mandatory referendum. Moreover, both sides had a price to pay for the failure of the negotiations.

In his view, it was precisely this system that pushed the participants forward.

Today, he warns, nothing of the sort exists.

We must restore that structure, otherwise we will once again be discussing the same thing endlessly, he says.

Do not reopen old disputes

Nami is especially skeptical about ideas to revisit agreements that have already been reached, including on power-sharing.

He reminds that both sides had previously said they were ready to continue negotiations from where they left off.

— I do not understand the logic of creating a problem where it has already been solved, — he notes.

In his opinion, the new proposals contain neither clear deadlines nor a mechanism for breaking the deadlock, nor consequences in the event of failure. And without that, a successful outcome looks unlikely.

The “Ercan for Varosha” deal

One of the most widely discussed ideas today remains a possible exchange: opening Ercan Airport to international flights in return for handing Varosha over to UN control with the possibility of the return of former residents.

Supporters believe such a step would show both communities the real benefits of compromise even before a final decision on the Cyprus issue.

But Nami sees a serious trap in this.

If, after such concessions, the new referendum ends in failure, each side will keep the benefits it has gained, and the incentive to seek a comprehensive solution may disappear.

A new “no” could bury the talks

In Nami’s view, this is where the main risk lies.

If Greek Cypriots receive Varosha before a final agreement, what will make them support the next peace plan? If Turkish Cypriots manage to ease isolation, why would they agree to further concessions?

As a result, the former negotiator warns, another “no” in a referendum could do more than simply slow the process down — it could effectively freeze it for decades.

Then, instead of the long-awaited reunification of the island, Cyprus could get a new reality: endless partial deals without a final resolution of the conflict.

And that, Nami believes, would no longer be a path to peace, but to the final entrenchment of the island’s division.