The Politics of Adopting Consociationalism: The Referendums of 2004

Abstract

This book has argued that the reluctance of political elites to overcome the division of Cyprus and adopt a power-sharing solution can be attributable to a number of factors. Of primary importance has been the oppressive and divisive role of historical memory and the clear desire of elites to fulfil what they perceive to be historical legacies. Heaped on top of that baggage has been the way the 1960 state broke down, subsequently interpreted by local elites as well as some international scholars as the fault of a flawed system, that of early corporate consociationalism. In 2004, the Annan Plan engineers tried to provide a system which would meet the most significant fears and demands of both communities, but by this time, these legacies of the past had created two societies in Cyprus that would have to overcome deep mutual mistrust and almost half a century of living apart. Labouring under different imaginings of the past and the future, the actual and perceived incentives for reunification under the conditions of a power-sharing state were vastly different for both the elites and public of each group. As a result, the plan was rejected by one group and accepted by the other.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?¹