The War and the British Bases

Cyprus, Colonial Legacies, and Strategic Risks in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Reassessing foreign military presence in a changing regional security environment.

The article «Ο πόλεμος και οι βρετανικές βάσεις» by Prof. Stephanos Constantinides examines the geopolitical implications of the British Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus in light of current tensions and military developments in the Middle East. The analysis highlights the strategic, legal, and political challenges associated with the continued presence and use of these bases on the territory of an independent state.

The author argues that the British bases in Cyprus represent a historical legacy of colonial rule and remain a political anomaly in the contemporary international system. Established under the Zurich–London Agreements that accompanied the independence of Cyprus in 1960, the bases at Akrotiri and Dhekelia were designed to secure British strategic interests in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East, particularly after Britain’s geopolitical setbacks following the Suez Crisis.

While the bases remain under British sovereignty, the article contends that British military presence extends beyond the geographical boundaries of the base areas through various operational arrangements across the territory of the Republic of Cyprus. These include the use of the national road network for military transport between the bases, the conduct of military exercises in areas outside the base zones, and the installation of strategic infrastructure such as radar systems in the Troodos region. According to the author, such arrangements raise significant questions regarding the scope of Cyprus’s effective sovereignty.

The current conflict involving the United States and Israel against Iran has once again drawn attention to the strategic role of the bases. The article suggests that, despite official denials, these installations may also be used by the United States in support of broader military planning in the region, potentially exceeding the legal framework under which they were originally established. In this context, the author argues that the presence of these bases risks linking Cyprus to regional conflicts in which it is not directly involved.

Historically, the bases have been used in military operations affecting the Middle East and surrounding regions. The article also raises concerns about their broader geopolitical role, including allegations that they have facilitated strategic plans detrimental to Cyprus’s own interests. Furthermore, during discussions related to the Annan Plan for Cyprus, Britain reportedly sought additional maritime rights associated with the base areas.

From a comparative perspective, Cyprus is described as one of the few remaining locations within the European Union where the United Kingdom maintains sovereign territory dating from the colonial period. Spain hosts a similar situation with Gibraltar. The article notes that the financial burden of maintaining overseas bases has periodically been debated in Britain, and it suggests that continued American strategic interest in the region may have contributed to their preservation.

The article also highlights a potential legal avenue for reconsidering the status of the bases. The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in the case of Mauritius concerning the Chagos Archipelago concluded that the process of decolonization had not been lawfully completed and called for Britain to withdraw from the territory. According to the author, this decision may establish an important precedent that could allow the Republic of Cyprus to question the legal status of the British bases.

The issue of financial compensation is also addressed. Under the Treaty of Establishment, Britain had undertaken to provide annual financial payments to the Republic of Cyprus for the use of the bases. However, these payments were suspended following the crisis of 1963–64, with the justification that the Turkish Cypriot community would not benefit from them.

The article further discusses recent debates concerning the deployment of Greek naval and air forces to Cyprus in the context of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. The author emphasizes that this deployment does not represent a revival of the former Joint Defence Doctrine between Greece and Cyprus but rather a temporary arrangement linked to broader strategic commitments undertaken by Athens (and possibly Nicosia) toward the United States and Israel.

In strategic terms, the author suggests that if the protection of the Republic of Cyprus were the primary objective, Greek forces would remain stationed on the island even after the end of the current conflict and Greece would formally assume responsibility for defending Cyprus against external threats. However, the article expresses skepticism regarding the likelihood of such a policy under the present political circumstances.

The broader regional context remains highly uncertain. The outcome of the conflict involving Iran is difficult to predict, and the potential for escalation continues to create security risks across the Eastern Mediterranean. In this environment, the article calls for a reassessment of Cyprus’s strategic position and of the long-term implications of hosting foreign military bases.

The author argues that the continued presence of foreign bases and the provision of military facilities to external powers may expose both Cyprus and Greece to significant strategic risks.

The article calls for a re-evaluation of existing arrangements and for a reconsideration of foreign policy priorities in order to ensure that the territory of both countries is not used for military operations against other states.