Nicosia, Cyprus: What a difference a decade makes! Just over a decade ago, the Republic of Cyprus was still a Non-Aligned Movement country that Washington only identified as a “problem,” a weak link on money laundering, a diplomatic liability on issues relating to Russia, and unhelpful on the Arab-Israel conflict.
To think that Cyprus would be considered a frontline state for Western security interests, one of Israel’s closest partners, and considered a “strategic partner” by the United States would have struck any policy audience as fanciful. But this is where we are at the end of 2024. Washington and Nicosia just concluded their first-ever U.S.-Cyprus Strategic Dialogue.
No one in Washington, D.C., views Cyprus as a problem. Quite the contrary, diplomats and policymakers see Cyprus as the solution for any number of problems.
Many previous speakers have expressed concern about what a second Donald Trump might mean for Europe. That is a fair question, though Europeans tend to project their own concerns onto the rest of the world. I spend most of my time in the Middle East and Africa where Trump was considerably more popular than Vice President Kamala Harris.
Regardless, when considering a second Trump term, the adage “personnel is policy” comes into play. During the first Trump Administration, Assistant Secretary of State Wess Mitchell and Secretary Mike Pompeo moved to redefine the U.S. relationship with Cyprus, prioritizing “strategic partnership” over the problem. They did not do it alone. Marios Lysiotis was the right ambassador at the right time in Washington. While we can focus on other top-line Trump appointees, not all are relevant to the bilateral relationship. Frankly, to understand where U.S. policy might go, it would behoove Europeans to focus as much on the vice president’s staffing as they do on some of the president-elect’s more controversial appointments.
What is certain in this era of uncertainty, however, is that U.S.-Cyprus ties will not only remain strong but will also strengthen. The reason is simple. No one in Washington, D.C., views Cyprus as a problem. Quite the contrary, diplomats and policymakers see Cyprus as the solution for any number of problems. In these polarized times, it is telling that Cyprus has become one of only four countries—India, Japan, and Australia are the others—that have truly bipartisan support and, indeed, support among the broader array of factions in Congress, from MAGA Republicans to progressive Democrats. This change in Cyprus’s diplomatic reputation was punctuated by the first ever U.S.-Cyprus Strategic Dialogue and then an Oval Office visit by President Nikos Christodoulides, the first by a Cypriot leader this century.
There are several reasons for this. First, Cyprus is realistic and constructive on issues surrounding issues. It does not virtue signal like many European countries and the United Nations do, but rather seeks solutions to problems. Diplomats travel to the United Nations when they want to pretend to be engaged but act mostly for public consumption. They travel to Nicosia when they want to get stuff done. Foreign Minister Constantinos Kombos has an international reputation as a leader demonstrating how small states can punch above their diplomatic weight on the world stage. Today, Cyprus and other small states—Togo, Armenia, and Oman—conduct the diplomacy that big states no longer do or can.
There has also been a sea-change in how Greek Americans have approached American policymakers, especially as a new generation of Greek Americans raised in American schools began to advocate for policy.
The U.S.-Cyprus future is also secure due to concern in Congress. Like a lot of policy areas, foreign policy takes a long time to change if left to the State Department. Just as the Helms-Burton law enshrined Cuba sanctions in U.S. law so that the whims of any single politician, even if in the Oval Office, could not change the policy meaningfully, so too has the Eastern Mediterranean Security and Energy Partnership Act taken Cyprus policy out of the political meat grinder: no single politician can change the trajectory of U.S.-Cyprus relations; it will take an act of Congress.
Bold change came from political leadership. In the case of Cyprus, Senators like Bob Menendez and Secretary of State-nominee Marco Rubio, Representatives like Gus Bilirakis, Ted Deutch, and David Cicilline changed policy towards Cyprus through legislation. Both they and Cyprus played the long game, wisely.
There has also been a sea-change in how Greek Americans have approached American policymakers, especially as a new generation of Greek Americans raised in American schools began to advocate for policy. The Hellenic American Leadership Council has become the model for effective advocacy, not only for Eastern Mediterranean issues but more broadly for all ethnic and regional interest groups.
Not all credit, however, goes to Cyprus and its lobby. Regional neighbors also shape the U.S.-Cyprus relationship. Russia’s Cold War mindset and naked aggression against Ukraine augmented Washington’s realization of Cyprus’s importance. What Russia did to Ukraine, Turkey did to Cyprus decades before. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s transformation of Turkey from an ally to a terror sponsor and police state has woken Americans and Europeans up to a new reality. Turkey today is Eritrea-on-the-Mediterranean and a liability to the liberal order. Turkey can no longer hold Cyprus hostage. As Cyprus has defined itself as a Western economy, democracy, and major diplomatic player, it will be impossible to go backwards or accept Turkey’s definition of the problems.
