History, especially contemporary history, teaches us that, just like every society, the international one is also double–faced. One of them is the face of conflict, change, the dialectic of power. The other one stands for balance, social rules and structures that describe the society at one point. Therefore, reaching a consensus and a balance, more than conflict, are defining traits of any given society. Within International Conflict Transformation, starting from the late 90’s, the focus has been set on conflicts based on identity, inter-group dialogue, bi-communal programs and intervention strategies through the citizens themselves. In the case of Cyprus, both Turkish-Cypriots and Greek-Cypriots perceive themselves as victims of one another, which makes it so that both of them have historical and territorial claims that reflect both sides of the same coin. The Turkish invasion of 1974 didn’t really serve anybody’s interests, quite the contrary. The Annan Plan, which was advocating for a federal bi-zonal and bi¬communal solution, was supported by the Turkish-Cypriot community, but it failed because of the rejection from the Greek-Cypriot community. The latter joined the European Union in 2004, while the Turkish-Cypriots continue being institutionally excluded, and have not been able to fully benefit the EU’s initiatives aimed at helping them out of isolation.
|Keywords:||Conflict, Exclusion, Dialogue, Cyprus, The European Union Stream: Nations, Nationalism, Communities|
Investigator Staff, Department of History, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Catalonia, Spain
There are currently no reviews of this product.Write a Review