The visit of Tufan Erhurman, the newly elected leader of the Turkish Cypriots, to Ankara on Thursday for his eagerly awaited meeting with President Tayyip Erdogan must have disappointed all those who hoped it would signal a change of stance on the Cyprus problem. Erhurman had made the pursuit of a federal settlement the central part of his election campaign, claiming he wanted all of Cyprus to be EU territory, a position that ruled out the two states that the Turkish government and his predecessor Ersin Tatar were committed to.

Comments made by Erdogan after Thursday’s meeting suggested that Turkey had no intention of changing its position. He repeated his belief that the “most realistic solution lies in the coexistence of two states on the island”.

“We maintain our stance that a solution in which the two peoples can live side by side in peace, prosperity and security is possible,” he said. The rest of his comments were an explanation of why the two-state solution was the only option. “The Greek Cypriot side desires to share neither political power nor economic prosperity with the Turkish Cypriots on the island,” he said among other things.

There were some signs indicating that Erdogan wanted to leave the new Turkish Cypriot leader in no doubt about who calls the shots. Although Erhurman was elected on October 19, he was kept waiting for almost four weeks for the meeting with the Turkish president. It should have taken place much sooner. The invitation was made on Monday, while in another departure from past practice, the three leaders of the ‘government’ alliance, led by ‘prime minister’ Unal Ustel, that had backed Tatar’s candidacy and were champions of the two-state solution, visited Ankara a few days before Erhurman. Ustel met Turkish vice president Cevdet Yilmaz, whom Erdogan said would coordinate Cyprus policy.

In these circumstances, Erhurman was cautious and diplomatic in the comments he made after Thursday’s meeting, his main concern, presumably being to stay on the right side of Erdogan. He did not rule out taking part in negotiations for a settlement but repeated the conditions he had set as leader of the opposition. He would sit at the negotiating table, if a there was a timeframe, talks were result-oriented and on condition there would be no return to the status quo if the Greek Cypriot side “once again flips the table at the last minute”. Importantly, he did not rule out reunification and a federal statement as Tatar had done.

Perhaps Erdogan also approves of this line, but refuses to change his public, two-state position before he hears that President Nikos Christodoulides is willing to accept Erhurman’s conditions for talks, something that is highly unlikely. The UN secretary-general’s envoy Maria Angela Holguin will be exploring this possibility when she returns to Cyprus as there is now a way forward, assuming that Erdogan will play along, which is not a given.

If this option is put on the table what would be Christodoulides’ response? Ever since his election he has been campaigning for the resumption of negotiations. He cannot walk away now that there might be an opportunity offered by Erhurman, whose conditions could not be dismissed as unreasonable given the history of the talks and the experiences of the last 20 years. Rationally speaking, if Christodoulides is as committed to a resumption of talks as he has been claiming in the last two years, he would seize any opportunity for a return to the negotiating table, even if there were suffocating time frames and the result has to be agreed in advance.  

This is just speculation for now, because the Turkish sides’ position is unclear. Has Erdogan actually given the go-ahead to Erhurman to seek a settlement other than the two states, or is the latter bluffing in an attempt to expose what the Turkish side sees as Christodoulides’ lack of sincerity. The last two-and-half years have been very easy for the Cyprus president, as he had Tatar in front of him who was never going to test his alleged support for a resumption of the talks. If he were bluffing, there was no danger that Tatar would ever call his bluff. Now, Erhurman could be bluffing, with Erdogan’s backing, but would Christodoulides dare to call it?