By This post is also available in: ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ (GREEK) TÜRKÇE (TURKISH)
The Mitsotakis-Erdoğan meeting in Ankara produced no historic breakthroughs, nor did it overturn the deep-rooted, entrenched differences between Greece and Turkey. The agreements announced fall squarely within the realm of so-called “low politics”—cooperation on the economy, energy, disaster management, strengthening communication channels. On the big issues, from maritime delimitation to the Cyprus problem, both sides stuck to their established positions.
But under these circumstances, what matters isn’t the text of the agreements. It’s the atmosphere. The tone. The language the Greek and Turkish leaders chose to use. And above all, the political will on display. Political will is no trivial thing. It’s the conscious choice of leaders to invest in dialogue even when they know it won’t deliver immediate political dividends. It’s the decision to manage domestic audiences with honesty and sobriety, resisting the temptation of inflammatory rhetoric. It’s persistence in the process when results don’t come easy.
In the case of Greek-Turkish relations, this will matters enormously. The differences are complex, historically charged, legally complicated. No meeting, however well-intentioned, can resolve them automatically or easily. Yet charting a course of cooperation, good neighbourliness, even friendship, creates the conditions to avert crises—and through averting crises, to allow the conditions for resolution to mature.
The message sent is twofold. To domestic audiences in both countries: that peaceful coexistence isn’t a sign of weakness but strategic maturity. And to the international community: that Athens and Ankara recognise their responsibility for stability in our volatile region.
For us Cypriots, this message carries particular weight. If the two mother countries (even if many don’t like the term) with open and profound differences can choose cooperation as their political framework, how much more so should we—Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots who urgently need ways to reach understanding about our one shared homeland.
Political will in Cyprus cannot exhaust itself in declarations and grand slogans. It demands action. It demands proposals that facilitate a solution, not erect fresh obstacles. Terms that advance the process, not drag it backwards. Safeguarding what’s already been agreed, not questioning it and renegotiating it all over again.
The Ankara meeting didn’t solve the problems. But it highlighted something perhaps equally important: that choosing dialogue and seeking compromise is an act of political responsibility. And that the resolve to work with patience, persistence, and realism is a prerequisite for any viable solution. Something that Cyprus, it seems, remains untouched by.
This article was originally published on 13.02.2026
