By Barçın Yinanç
It was already known that the questions posed to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on board the presidential plane were pre-prepared by the Directorate of Communications.
Media Ombudsman Faruk Bildirici has revealed, with concrete evidence this time, what has been an open secret. Bildirici received the full text of the questions and answers long before the conversation took place on the plane taking Erdoğan and journalists back to Turkey from Washington.
Regardless of the answers, the very questions that were asked give us some clues about the government’s agenda. For instance, it is noteworthy that during the last two foreign trips—returning from both Qatar and the U.S.—the elections in Northern Cyprus were brought up as a question.
I must confess that even as someone who closely follows foreign policy, the presidential election scheduled for October 19 on the island was not on my radar. With less than a month to go, it’s hardly followed by the Turkish public either.
So why does the Directorate of Communications feel the need to make Erdoğan speak on this issue twice? Most probably because, as the elections enter the final stretch, they see that Ankara’s favorite candidate, President Ersin Tatar, is losing ground.
‘NORMAL vs. ABNORMAL CONDITIONS’
Last week, I had the chance to spend two days on the island. The main thesis I heard about the elections was that “under normal circumstances, Republican Turkish Party (CTP) Chair Tufan Erhürman would win.”
The key phrase here, of course, is “normal circumstances.” We know that such circumstances no longer exist. What remains unclear is how far the “abnormal” might go.
No one can claim that governments in Ankara before the AKP did not interfere in the island’s elections. What makes the problem more acute is that the AKP does it brazenly—right in your face—without hesitation and without concealment.
THE 2020 TRAUMA
In 2020, the government went so far as to have then-President Mustafa Akıncı and his supporters threatened by the Turkish Intelligence Agency. In 2022, there were also strong suspicions that Ankara ousted the chair of the National Unity Party (UBP)—normally aligned with Ankara—from both the government and the party chairmanship for not showing enough obedience.
Today, the AKP is once again on the ground. To appeal to the Hatay-origin population on the island, Hatay MPs and former Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu have paid visits to Northern Cyprus. Ersin Tatar’s campaign music even bears the signature of popular singer Yavuz Bingöl.
ERHÜRMAN’S PROMISE
Will Ankara’s interference, which secured its preferred candidate in 2020, succeed again this time?
Compared to 2020, Erhürman’s biggest advantage is Ersin Tatar’s record over the past five years—something largely unknown back then. While it was to be expected that Ankara’s chosen candidate would fully submit to Ankara, Tatar’s perceived lack of seriousness in both domestic and foreign matters has become his weakest point.
That’s why it’s noteworthy that Erhürman’s statement, “I promise seriousness,” has drawn the loudest applause during his campaign.
Due to the semi-parliamentary system, a candidate’s stance on resolving the Cyprus problem has usually been the decisive factor in presidential elections. But this time, there is talk that public resentment toward the government may also play a role. Since taking office with Ankara’s blessing, Prime Minister Ünal Üstel has been embroiled in one scandal after another—from fake medical prescriptions to forged school diplomas.
CTP DIFFERS ON TALKS
When it comes to the candidates' approach to the Cyprus process, as expected, Ersin Tatar follows Ankara’s “two-state solution” line. Tufan Erhürman, on the other hand, is—as an islander acquaintance who dislikes both Tatar and the government put it—“but he’s a federation guy!”
The CTP has the tradition of staying at the negotiation table and discussing federation. However, its current approach differs markedly from the past.
The CTP’s earlier stance of sitting at the table unconditionally to discuss federation was often seen as overly naïve, as it rested on the assumption that the Greek Cypriots genuinely wanted a solution. While Greek Cypriots' rejection of the Annan Plan served as a wake-up call for the CTP, the foot-dragging of Greek Cyprus’ successive administrations after the referendum also proved eye-opening for the party.
‘LEARNING FROM THE PAST’
Meeting with a group of journalists from Turkey, Erhürman pointed to the need for change.
“Despite all our efforts, we achieved no result in the 2004 referendum, the 2009 Talat–Christofias talks, or the 2017 Crans-Montana negotiations. Clearly, something is wrong,” he said, and added: “After years of sitting at the same table and suffering the same disappointment, we must now learn our lesson. We need to find the answers to: Why did this happen, and what can we do differently this time?”
Of the four principles CTP has established for returning to the table, let me highlight what I consider the two most critical.
1- Negotiations will not be open-ended; they will have a timetable.
2- If the talks fail, there will be no return to the status quo.
Erhürman said: “We want guarantees from the outset. If the Greek Cypriot leadership walks away this time, there will be no return to today’s status quo. We will not sit at the table without confirming this in advance.”
The CTP may also have learned from Akıncı’s clashes with Ankara in 2020. Indeed, Erhürman uses careful language regarding relations with Ankara, saying: “I have never quarreled with Ankara.”
Strikingly, one group accuses him of being “a leftist/federationist,” hence anti-Ankara, while another criticizes him for not standing up firmly enough to Ankara.
WOULD GREEK CYPRIOTS BE THE HAPPIEST IF TATAR WINS?
The elections in Northern Cyprus are followed even more closely in the Greek Cypriot south than in Turkey. I guess that the Greek Cypriot Administration would prefer Tatar to win. I even suspect they might take provocative steps just to stir up “nationalist” sentiment.
Over the weekend, both Northern Cyprus and Ankara protested the Norwegian-flagged vessel Ramform Hyperion for conducting activities off the southern coast of the island. The timing by the Greek Cypriots was telling.
Each time Ankara and the Northern Cyprus president repeat their line on a two-state solution, the Greek Cypriots can hardly contain their joy. It conveniently masks the fact that they are actually the side that does not want federation or a settlement. After all, the continuation of the status quo serves their interests.
Recently, they have also increased pressure on Northern Cyprus. The arrest of several contractors has dealt a heavy blow to the island’s construction sector.
By contrast, the CTP’s advocacy of conditional negotiations would put the Greek Cypriots in a very difficult position.
WHAT DOES ANKARA REALLY WANT?
Ankara cannot remain indifferent to elections in North Cyprus, so it is important to carefully read what exactly the government’s real concern about Cyprus is.
The government does not even regard Cyprus as a key component of Turkish foreign policy. Despite repeatedly insisting that “We will discuss nothing but a two-state solution,” Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has twice participated in UN-hosted talks and held an informal one-on-one meeting with Greek Cypriot leader Nikos Christodoulides. In 2024, prior to these meetings, President Erdoğan and Christodoulides had a casual coffee conversation on the sidelines of the European Political Community summit in Hungary.
Yet, every move by the AKP suggests a lack of genuine concern for Turkish Cypriots. Notably, during Fidan’s meeting with his Greek Cypriot leader, Turkish Cypriot officials were left standing at the doorway.
What reaches us as a foul stench—but lines the pockets of a few—appears to be the true priority: the preservation of the island’s shadowy status quo.
