Search

Begin New Search Topic History Journal American Diplomacy

11. It’s Simple—the Cyprus Negotiations Will Fail: A Case Study

Author:
Roger L. Jennings
Publication Date:
04-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Currently the Greek and Turkish Cypriots are negotiating a unification of the two populations on the island of Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriots are very optimistic an agreement will be reached, but Greek Cypriot President Anastasiades counsels caution. When the world understands the history of Cyprus, the Greeks and the Turks, then people will understand why the negotiations as they are currently being conducted will fail. Ultimately, Turkey and its client the Turkish Cypriots will lose patience with the Greek Cypriot method of negotiation, and north Cyprus will become a province of the Republic of Turkey. The Greek Cypriots will not like a large influx of Turks to this new Turkish province. A successful conclusion to the negotiations is within the control of the Turkish Cypriots, but their leaders do not comprehend their potential and are not interested in advice. The current political administration of north Cyprus is following the same course as the failed prior political administrations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Sovereignty, History, Territorial Disputes, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, and Mediterranean

12. A ‘High Iron Railing’: Plans to Implement Partition in the Palestine Mandate and British India

Author:
Lucy Chester
Publication Date:
10-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
When the British Empire withdrew from South Asia in 1947, it carried out a hasty and poorly planned partition. When it withdrew from the Palestine Mandate in 1948, imperial officials chose not to divide Palestine. Prior to the Palestine decision, British officials spent decades examining the practical implications of partitioning the Mandate. During the same period, the British resisted discussing the possibility of partition in South Asia, only to hastily divide India and Pakistan in 1947.1 Despite their radically different approaches, these cases demonstrate three important points about the relationship between infrastructure, power, and partition (defined as territorial division carried out by a third party). First, infrastructure expresses state and colonial power.2 Second, in the case of Mandate Palestine, infrastructure illuminates how imperial priorities limited and ultimately doomed prospects for an Arab-Jewish partition. Detailed planning contributed to Britain’s rejection of partition in Palestine. Third, in South Asia, Britain’s lack of serious planning and failure to understand what partition would involve facilitated a territorial division marred by ethnic cleansing and mass migration—while also creating two proudly independent states.
Topic:
History, Territorial Disputes, Infrastructure, and Colonialism
Political Geography:
Britain, South Asia, Middle East, Palestine, and West Bank