The 2004 Annan Plan Referendum: 64.91% Said Yes, 75.83% Said No, and Cyprus Joined the EU Anyway

Why It Matters

On 24 April 2004, Cypriots voted on the same UN plan in two separate referendums. Turkish Cypriots approved it with 64.91% 'Yes', while Greek Cypriots rejected it with 75.83% 'No'. A week later, on 1 May 2004, the Greek Cypriot-administered Republic of Cyprus joined the European Union as the island's sole representative, and the community that had said 'Yes' stayed outside the EU's legal order. That outcome shapes every settlement debate since, including today's argument over sovereign equality.

Background

The plan and the vote

The Annan Plan, formally the 'Comprehensive Settlement of the Cyprus Problem', was a UN proposal that would have created a 'United Cyprus Republic'. It was a federation of two constituent states under a common federal government. The fifth and final version was completed on 31 March 2004 after the Bürgenstock talks in Switzerland. At those talks, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan was given the task of filling the gaps that the two sides and the guarantor powers had left open.

The design rested on a simple rule: the plan would enter into force only if both communities approved it in simultaneous, separate referendums. A 'No' on either side would defeat it.

Results

Because the plan needed approval from both sides, it failed. The Turkish Cypriot leader at the time, Rauf Denktaş, opposed the plan, but the Turkish Cypriot electorate voted 'Yes' under the then-Prime Minister Mehmet Ali Talat and with the backing of the Turkish government. Greek Cypriot President Tassos Papadopoulos urged rejection in a televised address on 7 April 2004.

Chronology: 2004 to 2024

For the 1960 foundations, see The 1960 Partnership Republic: How Cyprus's Constitutional Order Was Designed and Why It Broke Down. For the 1963 rupture, see The Global Anatomy on Bloody Christmas 1963 and the Akritas Plan.

What accession meant in practice

The EU admitted Cyprus as a single member state, but Protocol 10 to the 2003 Act of Accession suspended the application of EU law in the northern part of the island pending a settlement. The EU's General Affairs Council, in conclusions of 26 April 2004, said it wanted to end the isolation of the Turkish Cypriot community and to support its economic development. In the following years, the EU adopted a 'Green Line' regulation on movement of goods across the dividing line, and in 2006 an aid regulation worth €259 million for the Turkish Cypriot community. A proposed direct trade regulation, however, was never adopted.

Key Players & Positions

Greek Cypriot side (Republic of Cyprus)

According to the Republic of Cyprus Presidency and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the 2004 plan did not offer a functional, viable state. Papadopoulos's 7 April 2004 address and later official statements raised several objections:

• security arrangements and the continuing Turkish role under the guarantee system;
• restrictions on settlement and property rights;
• uncertainty about whether the plan would actually be implemented.

The Republic of Cyprus also maintains that Turkish Cypriots are EU citizens, that accession was lawful and that its reference framework is a bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality, as set out in relevant UN Security Council resolutions.

The European Union

The EU's official line, in the Council conclusions of 26 April 2004 and later statements, is that Cyprus is a member state as a whole, that EU law is suspended in the north pending a settlement, and that the Union supports a UN-led solution on the basis of a bizonal, bicommunal federation. EU leaders publicly regretted the Greek Cypriot result, but the accession date was not delayed, because the Accession Treaty had already been signed in Athens on 16 April 2003.

The United Nations

In his May 2004 report to the Security Council, Secretary-General Annan acknowledged the different outcomes of the two votes and urged steps to end the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots. Since then, successive UN-hosted formats have treated the two communities' political equality as the basis for any new process.

Turkish Cypriot leadership

The Turkish Cypriot position has evolved. Talat's administration in 2004 backed the plan. After Crans-Montana, the Turkish Cypriot leadership under Ersin Tatar advocated a settlement based on the sovereign equality and equal international status of the two sides. Positions in Nicosia, Lefkoşa, Athens, Ankara and Brussels continue to evolve, so readers should check the latest official statements.

Source Comparison

Media coverage often describes the 2004 outcome simply as 'Cyprus rejects UN plan'. That headline is accurate for the Greek Cypriot vote, but it omits the Turkish Cypriot majority. For more comparative analysis, see Record of Nations on Annan 2004 and Crans-Montana and Regions & Powers on why federation talks failed. Politepolity's method for weighing such sources is set out in Editorial Principles.

Key Terms & Related Guides

• Annan Plan: the 2004 UN proposal for a federal United Cyprus Republic. It required approval in both referendums.
• Protocol 10: the part of the 2003 Act of Accession that suspends the EU acquis in areas of Cyprus not under the effective control of the Republic of Cyprus.
• Treaty of Guarantee (1960): the treaty giving Türkiye, Greece and the United Kingdom guarantor roles and prohibiting union with any state. Related reading: Why Cyprus federation talks failed (The Polity Brief).
• TRNC: the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, proclaimed on 15 November 1983.
• Sovereign equality: the Turkish Cypriot and Turkish argument that the two peoples should negotiate as equals, with equal international status.
• Related Politepolity guides: The 1960 Partnership Republic, About Politepolity and the Politepolity home page.

Politepolity presents global and regional affairs with a dedicated perspective from Türkiye. Sections marked 'Türkiye's Position' reflect official Turkish policy and legal doctrines as stated by Turkish primary sources. — Politepolity Editorial Team