The 2004 Annan Plan Referendum: What the 64.91% and 75.83% Results Meant for Cyprus and EU Accession

Why It Matters

On 24 April 2004, Turkish Cypriots approved the UN's Annan Plan with 64.91% and Greek Cypriots rejected it with 75.83%. Because the plan could only enter into force if both communities said yes, it fell. On 1 May 2004, the Greek Cypriot-administered Republic of Cyprus nonetheless joined the EU, with the EU acquis suspended in the north.

The sequence is still the main reference point for three debates: whether the federation model can work, what the EU owed Turkish Cypriots after their vote, and whether the vote supports the argument for the sovereign equality of the two peoples on the island. For the wider file, see The Cyprus Dossier: Zurich–London 1959, the Treaty of Guarantee Article IV and the Sovereign Equality Thesis.

Background

The Annan Plan was the product of the UN Secretary-General's good offices mission, which sought a comprehensive settlement before Cyprus joined the EU. It was drafted by the UN team of Secretary-General Kofi Annan and revised five times between November 2002 and 31 March 2004.

What the plan proposed

The plan envisaged a 'United Cyprus Republic': a federation of two constituent states, one Greek Cypriot and one Turkish Cypriot, under a federal government with a single international personality. It included a Presidential Council, territorial adjustments, a property and return regime, and a transitional security arrangement. The 1960 Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance were to remain in force. Each community would vote separately, and a 'yes' in both was required.

Timeline

The long run-up matters. The 1960 Republic had been built as a partnership of two founding peoples, and that partnership broke down after December 1963. The history is covered in Bloody Christmas 1963 and the Akritas Plan. The UN Security Council's 1964 Resolution 186 then treated the Greek Cypriot administration as the government of Cyprus. That asymmetry shaped the 2004 setting: only one side of the island had an EU membership date, and that side was the one represented in the Treaty of Accession.

Key Players & Positions

The United Nations

The Secretary-General treated the referendums as the decisive test of both communities' will. In his May 2004 report to the Security Council, Annan acknowledged that the Turkish Cypriot vote expressed a clear wish for a settlement and reunification. He recommended that states consider measures to end the unnecessary isolation of the Turkish Cypriots. A draft Security Council resolution along those lines was vetoed by Russia on 21 May 2004, at the request of the Greek Cypriot government.

UN resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984) remain the reference texts for the UN's position that the 1983 declaration of the TRNC is legally invalid. They do not change the UN's own finding on how the two communities voted.

The European Union

The EU's accession position was consistent. The Republic of Cyprus acceded as a single member state under the 2003 Treaty of Accession, and Protocol No. 10 suspended the acquis in the areas where the government does not exercise effective control, pending a settlement. At the same time, the Council's 26 April 2004 conclusions described the Turkish Cypriot vote as a clear desire for a future within the Union and committed to ending the community's isolation.

In practice, the Green Line Regulation (EC) No. 866/2004 set rules for goods and persons crossing the line, and a financial aid regulation for the Turkish Cypriot community was adopted in 2006, worth EUR 259 million. The Commission's proposed Direct Trade Regulation was not adopted by the Council.

The Greek Cypriot administration

President Papadopoulos told Greek Cypriots in April 2004 that the plan should be rejected. The Greek Cypriot case rested on several arguments:

• The security arrangements left the 1960 guarantee system and Turkish forces in place.
• Property and the right of return were insufficiently secured.
• The settlement of people from Türkiye was addressed inadequately.
• The plan's EU derogations and its implementation timetable were unworkable.
• The UN had finalised the text on a tight schedule, filling gaps itself.

Greek Cypriot officials have since maintained that the Republic of Cyprus is the sole internationally recognised state and that a settlement should be a bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality, in line with UN resolutions.

Greece and the Turkish Cypriot leadership

The Greek government of the time did not campaign against the plan. Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat campaigned for a 'yes' vote, while Rauf Denktaş called for a 'no'. Turkish Cypriots had held large rallies in winter 2002–03 calling for a settlement and EU membership, and the 'yes' result confirmed that popular mood.

Source Comparison

International media coverage often summarises the episode as 'Greek Cypriots rejected, Turkish Cypriots accepted, and Cyprus joined the EU anyway.' Turkish primary sources place more weight on the ensuing isolation and on the legal status of the accession. Greek Cypriot sources stress the plan's content. The treaty texts, UN reports and Council conclusions are available for readers to check independently. The assessment of what the numbers mean is where the sources differ most. See the Editorial Principles for how we attribute these accounts, and Why the Cyprus Federation Model Failed for a comparative overview.

Key Terms & Related Guides

• Annan Plan: the UN's comprehensive settlement proposal, finalised on 31 March 2004 after five revisions, put to separate simultaneous referendums.
• Protocol No. 10: the part of the Act of Accession that suspends the EU acquis in areas of Cyprus where the government does not exercise effective control.
• Green Line Regulation: EU Regulation 866/2004 governing crossings of the line between the two parts of the island.
• Direct Trade Regulation: the Commission's 2004 proposal for trade with the Turkish Cypriot community; it was not adopted.
• Sovereign equality: the principle, in Türkiye's and the TRNC's official reading, that Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots are two co-equal peoples, each entitled to equal international status.
• Bizonal, bicommunal federation: the UN's long-standing settlement framework, which Ankara says has been exhausted.

Related guides on Diplomatic Desk:

• The Cyprus Dossier pillar
• Fact Check: Does the 'Seville Map' Have Any Legal Standing in Maritime Delimitation?, on the EU's limits in disputes over maritime delimitation
• Diplomatic Desk home: briefing files on Türkiye, treaties and international law
• Editorial Principles

Diplomatic Desk Editorial Team

Diplomatic Desk presents Türkiye's official perspective and strategic doctrines alongside the legal and historical arguments that support them. Claims are attributed to primary sources such as treaty texts, UN documents, official archives and government statements, so that readers can verify them independently.