The UN’s impartiality in Cyprus is in question due to unique funding arrangements with Cyprus and Greece, as well as actions by envoys like Maria Angela Holguin. To uphold impartiality, the UN must prioritize transparency, balanced financial contributions, and a strict adherence to peacekeeping principles.
How Impartial Can the UN Really Be in Cyprus?
The UN’s impartiality in Cyprus is questioned due to unique funding by Cyprus and Greece, and actions like those of envoy Maria Angela Holguin consulting with foreign politicians. To maintain impartiality, the UN must ensure transparency, balanced financial contributions, and a strict adherence to its peacekeeping principles.
The United Nations Peacekeeping Dilemma
The principles governing the United Nations’ peacekeeping missions are founded on consent, impartiality, and the limited use of force. Yet, the situation in Cyprus poses a challenge to these principles. There is a growing concern among Turkish Cypriots regarding the UN’s stance, especially in light of their diminishing trust in the UN and its peacekeeping force, Unficyp. The Turkish Cypriot community has even reached the point of requesting Unficyp to abandon their stations in the north, signaling a deep rift and lack of consent.
The usual practice for peacekeeping operations involves nations contributing troops and bearing the costs for their own soldiers, later to be reimbursed by the UN. However, Cyprus stands as an outlier where a significant portion of the peacekeeping budget is shouldered by the Republic of Cyprus and Greece, not by the international community through the UN. This arrangement, established in the early 1990s, raises questions about the possible impact on UN impartiality in the region.
Funding and Fairness
The financial contributions by Cyprus and Greece total $24 million, a sum that corresponds to the costs of military and police personnel within Unficyp. This direct funding model is unique and could potentially influence the perception of the UN’s neutrality. The logic behind this decision was economical, as the UN faced financial strain and did not view Cyprus as a hotbed of conflict, given the decades of relative peace preceding the decision.
An equitable solution might have involved the three guarantor countries of Cyprus’s constitution—Turkey, the UK, and Greece—contributing to the shortfall, thus mitigating any perceived conflict of interest. Moreover, there is an ongoing debate about the necessity of the UN’s presence in Cyprus and whether a strategic withdrawal plan could benefit all Cypriots economically and socially.
Confidence in the UN’s Role
The peacekeeping force’s task is further complicated by its dual role of maintaining peace on the ground and assisting in the political process aimed at resolving the Cyprus issue. Accusations of bias from both sides concerning activities in the buffer zone are common, though they vary in validity. The political support provided by the UN is also under scrutiny, especially when envoys overstep their mandates by involving external powers that may exert pressure on the local communities.
The case of Maria Angela Holguin, the UN Secretary-General’s personal envoy, serves as an illustration. She was tasked with finding common ground for negotiations but deviated by consulting with foreign politicians. Such actions could be interpreted as attempts to coerce the communities through influential countries, casting doubt on the impartiality and scope of the UN’s political support in Cyprus.
The Way Forward
The UN’s effectiveness in Cyprus hinges on its ability to demonstrate adherence to its foundational principles. As the relationship between the UN and Cyprus currently stands, there is a risk of undermining the trust of the communities the UN aims to unite. Transparency in operations, equitable financial contributions, and a steadfast commitment to impartiality are essential for the UN to fulfill its role in Cyprus effectively. Without these, the UN’s mission may continue to face challenges and skepticism from those it aims to serve.
How is the UN’s impartiality in Cyprus affected by unique funding arrangements?
The UN’s impartiality in Cyprus is called into question due to the unique funding arrangements with Cyprus and Greece, where a significant portion of the peacekeeping budget is shouldered by these countries. This direct funding model could potentially impact the perception of the UN’s neutrality in the region.
What are some challenges to the principles of UN peacekeeping missions in Cyprus?
The situation in Cyprus poses challenges to the principles of UN peacekeeping missions, especially regarding consent, impartiality, and the limited use of force. There is a growing concern among Turkish Cypriots regarding the UN’s stance, leading to diminishing trust and a request for Unficyp to abandon their stations in the north, indicating a lack of consent.
How does the direct funding model by Cyprus and Greece influence the UN’s neutrality?
The financial contributions by Cyprus and Greece directly fund a significant portion of the peacekeeping budget in Cyprus. This unique funding model raises questions about the UN’s neutrality and impartiality in the region, as it differs from the usual practice where nations contribute troops and are later reimbursed by the UN.
What steps can the UN take to improve its effectiveness and maintain impartiality in Cyprus?
To enhance its effectiveness and uphold impartiality in Cyprus, the UN should prioritize transparency in operations, ensure balanced financial contributions from all relevant parties, and strictly adhere to its peacekeeping principles. Additionally, a strategic withdrawal plan and unbiased political support can help the UN regain trust and effectively fulfill its role in Cyprus.
