Ideational Viability of Peace : A case study of ideas related to peace and their consequences for the Cyprus peace process

The Republic of Cyprus is often thought of as a tourist destination and hot spot for sun thirsty expats. Hidden from plain sight amongst holiday homes and blue waters, it may thus seem counterintuitive that Cyprus is home to a toxic ethno-nationalist political conflict that has mandated one of the longest running United Nations peace interventions to date. Still, life in Cyprus does not resemble a conflict zone. This beckon the conceptual debate of peace as more than the absence of war and raises questions of how peace is perceived by involved actors and subsequently, how it is influenced by subjective ideas. With negotiations stuck in a cycle of stalling and reassuming, the peace process is often described as the Cypriot deadlock. The cause of the deadlock is debated without consensus, but frequently boils down to disagreements over policies and issues of intercommunal mistrust. Looking to nuance these notions, this thesis aims to explain the deadlock ideationally by analysing ideas of peace as expressed by political elites and assess how they influence the peace process. The research presents a typological method for mapping ideational biases corresponding to meta-ideas of International relations theory. The central argument of this thesis is that the Cypriot peace process is deadlocked due to divergent ideational biases of political elites, rendering the rationales and strategies (the ideational underpinnings) behind the peace process ideationally unviable. This desktop study of Cyprus is based of primary data from the official websites of the Republic of Cyprus, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, and the United Nations, published between January of 2019 and April of 2021