President Erhürman: We will use the five-year term as a period of rebirth for the Turkish Cypriot People
“We will be here again in my second 100 days in office and will maintain the same transparency”
“The meetings are ongoing, will continue, and we remain committed to staying at the table”
President Tufan Erhürman marked his first 100 days in office with a press conference held on Monday at the White Hall of the Presidency. During the conference, which included a video presentation, the President outlined the work carried out during this period, shared information on recent developments regarding the Cyprus issue, and presented the First 100 Days booklet to members of the press. President Erhürman stated that such press conferences will be held every 100 days to keep the press informed about the work of the Presidency, adding that English-language social media platforms have been launched and that a Greek-language website will be introduced in the near future.
President Tufan Erhürman’s statement at the press conference was as follows:
“THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT AN INSTITUTION CONCERNED SOLELY WITH THE CYPRUS ISSUE”
“Distinguished members of the press, first of all, I would like to welcome you. As you know, in democratic systems it is customary to carry out an overall assessment after the first 100 days in office. As of yesterday, we have completed our first 100 days in office. Since yesterday coincided with a Sunday, we chose to hold this press conference today. You may access the First 100 Days booklet via the QR code. As the first main issue, we addressed developments related to the Cyprus problem. The second focused on relations with the Republic of Türkiye, followed by diplomatic relations with other countries. The fourth main heading -- as we repeatedly emphasised before the elections -- reflects our view that the Presidency is not an institution concerned solely with the Cyprus problem; it is also vested with domestic powers that must be exercised and assumes a coordinating role even in areas where it does not have direct authority. Accordingly, during the election period, we committed to establishing and operationalising certain working groups, which we refer to as working units. Explanations regarding these are included in the fourth section, which I will address shortly.”
PRESIDENT ERHÜRMAN ON THE CYPRUS ISSUE: “LET US REACH CONCRETE OUTCOMES IN LEFKOŞA FIRST, AND THEN PROCEED TO A 5+1 MEETING”
“Where does the process regarding the Cyprus problem stand? To evaluate this, it is useful to recall where it was when we took over. As you know, during the past five-year period, the two most prominent points in this regard were the Geneva and New York meetings, which were held in the 5+1 format and considered as informal meetings. Hence, there was no official negotiation process.
Again, as our journalist friends will recall very well -- I made the following statement during the election period. I stated that these issues are matters that, until now, could be grouped under the heading of confidence-building or confidence-enhancing measures. As you know, in my assessments prior to the elections, I stated that “it is not meaningful to address these issues at the 5+1 level in Geneva or New York”. The reason is straightforward: these matters have already been discussed and, in some cases, results have already been achieved. Reaching further outcomes on these issues does not require the UN Secretary-General and the three guarantor countries to be seated at the table. For such matters, the 5+1 format is simply too high-level. Moreover, concluding a 5+1 meeting without tangible results does not serve the prestige of the United Nations, the three guarantor countries, or the two leaders. At a meeting of this level, it is essential that at least some concrete outcomes be achieved before leaving the table. For this reason, this has been a point we have emphasised from the very first day of our term in office. The 5+1 format is by no means something we seek to avoid. We will participate in any meeting that is necessary. However, in our view, the correct approach is to first reach concrete results in Lefkoşa on the confidence-building measures already on the table, and only then proceed to a 5+1 meeting -- thereby creating the opportunity to announce positive developments as an outcome of that process. We have consistently maintained this position.”
“WE PRESENTED OUR FOUR-POINT METHODOLOGY PROPOSAL AT THE FIRST MEETING”
“Three trilateral meetings have been held between the two leaders under the UN auspices, within three months and ten days. At the first of these trilateral meetings, we presented our four-point methodology proposal, which we had put forward long before the elections. In addition, we proposed ten new confidence-building measures. It goes without saying that the issues discussed in Geneva and New York remain part of the ongoing talks. In addition to these, there are the four-point methodology proposal and a ten-point package of new confidence-building measures, that we have put forward at the first meeting.
One example is the joint visit to the Committee on Missing Persons (CMP) — a quite ordinary act, not even a confidence-building measure in our view — but important given the circumstances at the time. Why? You will recall that the European Parliament adopted a decision concerning the construction of a monument solely for Greek Cypriot missing persons. This visit was proposed by us to honour the memories of all missing persons, Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot alike, and to highlight that investigations regarding all missing persons are conducted by the CMP. This visit took place.”
“AT THE LAST MEEETING, WE REMINDED MR. CHRISTODOULIDES ABOUT PROVIDING ROAD TAX SERVICE AT BOSTANCI AND DERINYA CROSSINGS”
“You will also recall the long-standing issue regarding the signing of a contract with Bureau Veritas by the Greek Cypriot competent authority concerning the registration of Hellim (Halloumi). We stated that this needed to be completed as soon as possible. Mr. Christodoulides stated that this would be finalised by the end of January. We made proposals to ease congestion at Metehan, including increasing the number of booths to seven and ensuring permanent staffing, as well as providing road tax service at the Bostancı and Derinya crossings. A commitment was in fact made in the presence of Ms. María Holguín Cuellar, Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary-General on Cyprus, that results on these issues would be achieved by 31 January. We have observed that seven booths have been installed at Metehan. However, as the road construction on the Greek Cypriot side has not yet been completed, they are not yet operational. In addition, work to provide road tax services at the Derinya and Bostancı crossing points has not as yet been started.
Therefore, we once again reminded Mr. Christodoulides of this at the last meeting. Unfortunately, the contract regarding Hellim has still not been signed.”
“OUR AIM WAS FOR CHILDREN FROM BOTH PEOPLES TO COME TOGETHER IN A FRIENDLY SPORTS TOURNAMENT”
“One of our proposals was also a friendly sports match for U14s. For some reason, this proposal sparked considerable debate. Throughout the discussions, we emphasised that it did not have to be football, and that it could equally be basketball, handball, or volleyball. We also stated that if team participation posed difficulties, individual involvement in athletics or gymnastics would be possible. The underlying aim was to bring children from both peoples together in a friendly sporting event.
At the time, some criticism appeared in our press, questioning: “Were you able to convince the Republic of Türkiye to play such a match whilst requesting this from the Greek Cypriots?” I am not sure if it was widely noticed, but just a few days ago I attended a handball tournament in Girne. Teams from the Republic of Türkiye, Uzbekistan, Kosovo, and Kazakhstan participated. It was not a U14 event, but U16. This clearly demonstrates that there is no real obstacle to holding such events, and it is equally clear that we do not pursue any political objective through them. Unfortunately, however, our proposal on this matter was not accepted. As we stated before the elections, there is no need for such issues to be addressed at the 5+1 level; they should be resolved in Lefkoşa.”
“OUR ULTIMATE AIM IS THE RESOLUTION OF THE CYPRUS PROBLEM”
“The statement by Ms. Holguín that a 5+1 meeting will not be convened unless progress is achieved on confidence-building measures reflects the position we have maintained since before the elections. The objective is clear: the resolution of the Cyprus problem. We have consistently emphasised that a solution is crucial for ensuring predictability and visibility in this country. Yet more than eight years have passed since Crans-Montana, and no meaningful process of engagement has occurred. Since the first visit of Ms. Holguín, several developments have undermined trust, including the 21 December statement by the Greek Cypriot leader—the first of its kind—and what I have described as the ‘peering-through-the-hole ritual’ during the EU officials’ visit. Further setbacks include the unfinished implementation of road tax services at the Bostancı and Derinya crossings, as well as the failure to resolve the Hellim issue by 31 January. UN reports state that there is a need to create an environment conducive to a solution. This is the first step. Once achieved, a 5+1 meeting can take place with a positive outcome. Our core objective has always been to achieve tangible results, demonstrate that the two leaders can deliver, and build trust. The four-point proposal is aimed precisely at this core objective, by establishing procedural rules from the outset.”
“ROTATING PRESIDENCY MUST BE GUARANTEED FROM THE OUTSET”
“Unfortunately, this is not the first time I am saying this. Today, I came across different assessments in some news reports. Until now, I have not communicated to my people that any progress has been made on any issue beyond the four I just mentioned. I do not agree with the claim that ‘the two leaders are telling their peoples different things, but Ms. Holguín is telling the truth.’ We are very clearly stating the truth: so far, no progress has been achieved.
One of the reasons progress has not been made is that even within those four items -- which were meant to create some level of trust -- there has been no progress.
By the four items, I mean the road tax and hellim issues. What we have said regarding these four items is very clear. It concerns procedure and methodology. The fact that it is about methodology and procedure is clearly indicated, as in each case we emphasise it in principle. Regarding political equality, I will give the example of the rotating presidency only. What we are very clearly stating is this: We are not yet discussing whether the rotating presidency would be divided two-to-one, three-to-one, or four-to-one, nor are we discussing its content. We are saying that, in principle, if any structure is to be established and political equality is to exist, it must be guaranteed that the two components -- Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots -- can hold the presidency of that structure for certain periods. Can you imagine a structure in which there is political equality, but one of the two components can never hold the presidency of that structure throughout history? This must be guaranteed from the outset. An example of this existed in the 1960 Constitution. In recent times, due to the events of 1963, the letters written by the late [former Turkish Cypriot Leader] Dr. Fazıl Küçük have been republished. If you look at those, you can actually see the cost of not having a rotating presidency, and how it led to rather terrible outcomes.”
“THE MEETINGS ARE ONGOING, WILL CONTINUE, AND WE REMAIN COMMITTED TO STAYING AT THE TABLE”
“Our position, which we have held long before the pre-election period, aligns with the statement of UN Secretary-General António Guterres that this time must be different. However, if it is indeed to be different, what precisely will constitute that difference? We developed our own proposals and stated that if this time is to be different, the methodology must at least be clear from the outset. First, the rules and procedures should be established -- only then can we move on to the substantive issues and discuss the content. This is the point we have reached. Nevertheless, I will state very clearly that I am not personally disappointed or demoralised. The reason is this: a five-year period of stagnation -- but if you look further back, more than five years, 2017 was Crans Montana -- so it has been an eight-year period of stagnation. Since my election, regarding the CMP, the visits conducted by EU officials and considering the issues around 21 December, the meetings have been ongoing and will continue. We will always remain at the table and are not setting any red lines. These are issues that should be implemented in this country as confidence-building measures. If we are serious about a solution, progress must advance through these measures.”
“THE PROCESS IS CONDUCTED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE REPUBLIC OF TÜRKİYE”
“In the last meeting, Mr. Christodoulides put forward five additional points. One of these concerns confidence-building measures, specifically the crossings at Haspolat, Kiracıköy, and Eğlence. Since New York, there has been a map on the table, however Erenköy was not included. In the five points presented by Mr. Christodoulides, Erenköy was added. As a result, the issue has moved to a point even more difficult to resolve. When did this happen? It came up during the third trilateral meeting. We are not at the point we would like to be. But I can say with peace of mind: it has only been three months. Naturally, in three months, some points of disagreement will arise. As someone who has been part of these processes, I know this very well. We are also in a period when the Greek Cypriot side is holding the EU presidency. We are in a period when we know general elections will be held in the South in May. Therefore, it is clear that reaching solutions during this period will require time. In this context, the question arose: how will relations with the Republic of Türkiye develop? Regarding the Cyprus issue, all of our leaders have consistently conducted meetings and processes in close consultation with the Republic of Türkiye. From the outset -- as we emphasised both before and after the elections -- the process on this matter has been carried out in coordination with Turkish officials. On this matter, the Republic of Türkiye and the TRNC may hold differing positions at various points. What is important is that the consultation process allows diplomatic relations to continue uninterrupted. In this country, if you truly want a solution, that solution involves two leaders and three guarantor countries. You must produce a settlement that all three guarantor countries will approve. As the Turkish Cypriot leader, your responsibility is also to conduct a very serious give-and-take, diplomatic, and consultation process not only with these three guarantor countries -- Türkiye and the Greek Cypriot leadership -- but also, as it has become even more apparent in this period, with many other regionally influential states.”
INTENSIVE EXTERNAL CONTACTS AND MEETINGS… CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF CHILDREN FROM MIXED MARRIAGES
“In the past three months, you can see that both I and our Undersecretary, Mr. Mehmet Dânâ, have engaged in very intensive external contacts and meetings. By external contacts, I do not mean traveling somewhere but rather receiving foreign ambassadors and representatives here. Among these are states known to be influential in the region, such as the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. In meetings we held with their representatives, we had the opportunity both to put forward our views on the Cyprus problem and to share our perspectives on confidence-building measures. The issue that comes up most frequently in our discussions with them, aside from the Cyprus issue itself, is the citizenship rights of children born of mixed marriages. From the outset, we have approached this not as a confidence-building measure but as a human rights issue. We continue to share this human rights concern with all our interlocutors, just as we do regarding all the other confidence-building measures.”
“EASING THE PROBLEMS AT METEHAN IS NOT IN FAVOUR OF THE TURKISH CYPRIOTS AND AGAINST THE GREEK CYPRIOTS”
“I would also like to emphasise the following regarding confidence-building measures. When we first presented these, the following comment was made: ‘Tufan Erhürman proposed a ten-point confidence-building measures package, but these are all in favour of the Turkish Cypriot people. A CBM package should satisfy both sides, a win-win, so that real trust can be built.’ I responded as follows: Easing the problems at Metehan is not in favour of only the Turkish Cypriots and against the Greek Cypriots. Providing road tax services at Derinya and Bostancı is not only in favour of the Turkish Cypriots and against the Greek Cypriots, because it means the burden at the Metehan crossing will be reduced – the traffic congestion there will be eased. Also, the hellim issue is not in favour of only the Turkish Cypriots and against the Greek Cypriots, because hellim is a jointly registered PDO. Regarding the export of hellim, if it is to be considered in favour of the Turkish Cypriots, you know we are talking about 2026. This is a process that started roughly nine years ago and was initiated by the two leaders.
The reciprocal football matches and friendlies are unrelated to this. There was an assumption that Turkish Cypriots could not organise such sporting events and would need to do this with Greek Cypriots – but that is not the case. Our U14 team recently traveled to Trabzon, Türkiye, and earlier to Azerbaijan, where they played a match against Dinamo. Just recently, a handball tournament was held in Girne. These sports events were not undertaken out of necessity; the aim was to bring children from different peoples together so they could get to know one another more closely. Regarding the crossings, as we have stated, the map was already on the table when we assumed office. In other words, we were not the first to propose Haspolat, Akıncılar, or the Kiracıköy–Eğlence route – that map already existed. According to that map, Haspolat will make life easier for both Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots.”
“A NEW VEHICLE CROSSING IS CLEARLY NEEDED IN LEFKOŞA"
It is obvious that a new vehicle crossing is needed in Lefkoşa. Additionally, the Kiracıköy–Eğlence route is in fact not for the benefit of Turkish Cypriots but rather proposed for Greek Cypriots who want to reach Lefkoşa from Larnaca more quickly. That is of course not a problem for me -- Greek Cypriot traffic can flow more smoothly. We are putting forward proposals aimed at providing tangible solutions to the problems. As you know, there is even a proposal on the table for a completely new road to be built directly by our side, with the cost covered. What is the purpose? Turkish Cypriots will not be traveling to Eğlence excessively. But we do not see the issue that way. Everybody should benefit. The Akıncılar crossing is not primarily for Turkish Cypriots; it is intended for those traveling from Larnaca. Among the things we proposed, I personally do not feel that there is anything that shows that we view the matter in this manner. Regarding the additional proposals made by Mr. Christodulidis, at the last meeting I went over them one by one and explained that some of the proposals are already being implemented in practice. Discussions on the Haspolat Wastewater Treatment Plant issue had taken up a significant time period of the second meeting of the two leaders that lasted three hours. Forty-five minutes of that three-hour meeting were spent on the claim that there was a problem at Haspolat. My undersecretary and I were so involved that it became necessary for us to call the mayor of Lefkoşa, Mr. Mehmet Harmancı, thinking that perhaps incorrect information had been conveyed to us. In fact, that telephone conversation was reported by some as though I had called Mr. Fidan [Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Türkiye], whereas both I and Mr. Dânâ had called Mr. Harmancı. Afterwards, we asked the mayor to organise a meeting with his counterpart present, along with Mr. Dânâ and Mr. Menelaou, to discuss this issue, because we knew there was no problem. However, under the assumption that there was an issue, 45 minutes of the three-hour meeting were spent on it, and Haspolat was even included in the joint statement. That meeting took place at our request. During that meeting, Mr. Harmancı, together with his counterpart, stated that there was no problem and that an agreement had already been reached, and the meeting concluded. We experienced this firsthand. That is why, at the last meeting, I went through Mr. Christodulidis’ proposals point by point. For some, I explained that they would be implemented unilaterally; for others, I clarified that there was in fact no practical issue. He did not review our proposals. Instead, he chose to put forward his own, referring to them as ‘forward-looking road proposals.’”
“THIS CALL IS NOT DIRECTED AT US”
“Distinguished press members, I would like to remind you of two points from the reports and resolutions of the UN regarding these issues. In paragraph 52, of the report dated 5 January 2026 by the UN Secretary-General, Mr. Antonio Guterres, relating to the UN Operation and Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, he states: ‘In their efforts to promote closer cooperation between the communities, local and international actors continue to be confronted with challenges and obstacles linked to the status of the north and concerns relating to “recognition”. While the United Nations policy on Cyprus is maintained and decisions of the Security Council on the matter are upheld, I reiterate that concerns about recognition should not in themselves constitute an obstacle to increased cooperation. As part of efforts to promote closer cooperation between the communities, local and international actors continue to face challenges and obstacles related to the status of the North and recognition. UN policy on Cyprus is being maintained. I emphasise once again that concerns about recognition alone should not constitute an obstacle to further cooperation.’
So, what is Mr. Guterres saying? There will be no legal explanation regarding the issue of recognition of the TRNC, however some cooperation areas are being blocked out of concern that the TRNC might be recognised in practice. The Secretary-General has called on all parties not to obstruct these areas of cooperation, noting that such concerns are unfounded. Yet, even as we continue to discuss Confidence-Building Measures, we constantly face the approach: ‘you are doing this actually to achieve recognition by implication.’ The Secretary-General is aware of this, and it is not the first time he has written about it in this report; in earlier reports, he also called on parties not to let concerns over recognition become a factor that obstructs cooperation. No doubt you can appreciate that the call is not directed at us, but at the Greek Cypriot leadership.
The second point relates to the latest Security Council resolution. Dated 30 January 2026, the Secretary-General in his report to the Security Council, stated that socioeconomic disparity between the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots risks further estrangement on the island and encouraged efforts to address it. The resolution has made clear reference to the socioeconomic disparity, stating that this could potentially affect prospects for a settlement. The report urges efforts to be made to mitigate this through meaningful contacts in particular.
I believe both of these points certainly need to be kept in mind when discussing Confidence-Building Measures.”
“18 WORKING UNITS BECAME OPERATIONAL IN THE FIRST 100 DAYS”
“You will recall that in our pre-election programme about what I would do in my first 100 days in office, we stated that approximately 15–20 working units would be established here. Eighteen working units are now operational. Let me give you some data regarding one of them. We established a unit called the Public Administration Monitoring and Evaluation of Citizens’ Complaints Unit. In the first 100 days, this unit received 119 requests or complaints concerning various ministries, public institutions, and offices. Of these, 58 were resolved positively, in line with the citizens’ requests. Eighteen were resolved negatively, with explanations provided to the citizens that the requests could not be legally fulfilled. Forty-three complaints are still under review. Within these 100 days, the Presidency has become an institution where citizens can submit applications, and a mechanism has been activated that can produce solutions to their problems.
I will outline the main points regarding the 18 working units. They operate based on two key principles, and include people from different perspectives. I emphasise that these units have been established solely at the Presidency, aside from the technical committees. The technical committees continue to function; and they are separate from these units. Two objectives stand out. First, units such as the EU Relations Unit, the Property Unit, and the Public Diplomacy Unit focus on long-neglected tasks, particularly international work, and had not been active for some time. Second, units like the Culture and Arts Unit and the Cultural Heritage Unit are designed to take advantage of the five-year stable term of the Presidency. Governments may change, ministers may change, directors may change. It may not be possible to implement medium- and long-term plans under such circumstances. As I mentioned during the election period, the Presidency has a five-year term. The first 100 days have passed; we still have four years and eight months ahead. During this period, these units are designed to present medium- and long-term plans, establish proper diplomatic relations with the current and future governments, and offer a new vision for our society.
We also stated that the Presidency would pay attention to Parliament and government activities. Within the first 100 days, the necessary steps were taken to ensure the lawful appointment of the Executive Board of the Eastern Mediterranean University. An international protocol was sent to the Constitutional Court for its opinion. A bill sent from Parliament a few days ago was returned to the legislature for reconsideration.”
“WE WILL USE THE FIVE-YEAR TERM AS A PERIOD OF REBIRTH FOR THE TURKISH CYPRIOT PEOPLE”
“Regardless of what anyone may say, my personal view is as follows: we intend to use this five-year term as a period of rebirth for the Turkish Cypriot people and to fulfil the responsibilities that this entails. All our efforts are directed towards this goal and will continue to be so. By ‘rebirth,’ I mean that meaningful, serious, and results-oriented work on the Cyprus issue will be carried out continuously, focused on achieving a settlement and implementing confidence-building measures.”
Second, regarding relations with the wider world, even greater effort will be made than at present. Additional energy will be devoted to raising the international visibility of the Turkish Cypriot people, and intensive work will be undertaken to ensure that their institutional structures, culture, arts, and identity -- which are currently a source of concern -- become a source of pride within these five years. One thing we categorically reject -- and I have full respect for those who offer criticism -- is the notion that ‘Nothing can come of this country; we cannot do this.’ That phrase has been removed from our vocabulary, for we can achieve, and we can succeed. The potential of our country and our people is more than sufficient.
However, the weaknesses in our institutional structure, the weaknesses in the economy, and the weaknesses related to development in culture and the arts are, unfortunately, obstacles to what we are trying to achieve externally. Even though they may appear as separate compartments, all of these are transitional and interconnected. By acting on all of them together, one truly makes an effort towards the rebirth of the Turkish Cypriot people.”
“WE WILL BE HERE AGAIN IN THE SECOND 100 DAYS”
“In the second 100 days in office, we shall again be here. We want to continue the same transparency and mutual exchange with the public. Regarding the press, there was the Turkish-language Presidency website. The English version has also been launched. The Greek version will be launched in a short time. We are preparing for that. If we want a solution in this country, we need to be in contact with the Greek Cypriot people and Greek Cypriot opinion leaders. We will make efforts both for personal contacts and to address them in Greek, and to maintain transparency toward them as well.”