Minority protection, border changes, grey zones – “copy–paste” arguments that collapse under international law. The hypocrisy of the international community toward Moscow and Ankara.
The comparison between Cyprus and Ukraine is inevitable. In both cases, we see invasion, occupation, revisionism, and faits accomplis created by force. A sober analysis, however, does more than highlight the similarities; it underscores the common methods used by Russia and Turkey, as well as the hypocrisy of an international community that applies double standards in its response.
Three key reference points
In Cyprus, UN Security Council Resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984) declared the self-proclaimed “TRNC” null and void, calling on all states not to recognize it, with specific mention of Varosha.
In Ukraine, the UN General Assembly condemned both the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the attempted “annexation” of four regions in 2022, with 143 countries voting in favor. The main obstacle here was Russia’s veto at the Security Council.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), in March 2022, ordered Russia to immediately halt military operations in Ukraine, rejecting Moscow’s claims of “genocide” against Russian speakers as baseless. Similarly, in Cyprus, the Security Council from the first day of the 1974 invasion demanded a ceasefire and the withdrawal of foreign troops.
Human rights violations
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Turkey exercises “effective control” over the occupied north of Cyprus and is responsible for human rights violations there.
Likewise, in 2025, the same Court attributed extensive violations to Russia dating back to 2014, while the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Commissioner Lvova-Belova over the abduction of Ukrainian children.
The “copy–paste” arguments
- Minority protection: Moscow speaks of “protecting Russian speakers,” Ankara of “protecting Turkish Cypriots.” Both narratives have collapsed in international courts.
- Unilateral border changes: In Cyprus with the pseudo-state, in Ukraine with sham referendums in Donbas.
- Grey zones: Turkey challenges Cyprus with drilling in its EEZ; Russia creates “buffer zones” in Georgia and Moldova.
- Weaponizing people: From Ankara’s use of migrants on the Greek-Turkish border to Russia’s deportation of children from Ukraine.
Differences not to be ignored
In Cyprus, the 1974 coup by the junta preceded the invasion, but this cannot legitimize half a century of occupation. In Ukraine, no internal upheaval occurred in 2022; the Russian attack was outright aggression.
Turkey invokes the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee, yet no legal basis exists for the continued presence of its troops or settlement policies. Russia, meanwhile, never had even that pretext—only fabricated claims of “genocide.”
Cyprus is an EU member state, and the occupation of 37% of its territory is a European security issue. Yet sanctions against Ankara remain soft. By contrast, Russia faces harsh sanctions and unprecedented isolation.
Revisionism as common ideology
Russia and Turkey share a mindset: creating facts on the ground by force, hoping time and international tolerance will normalize them. From drilling in the Eastern Mediterranean to annexations in Georgia and Ukraine, their methods mirror one another.
Conclusion
Equating Cyprus and Ukraine too easily can be misleading. The scale and dynamics differ. Yet the essence remains: violation of international law, challenges to sovereign borders, and the international community’s failure to act consistently against revisionism in all its forms. That inconsistency may be the most troubling lesson for the future.
