Newsroom
Tom Barrack, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey, told Kathimerini in an interview with Manolis Kostidis that Cyprus must be included in any broader effort to stabilize the Eastern Mediterranean, saying “you cannot have an abscess in the middle of an otherwise healthy body.” Barrack, who spoke on the sidelines of a visit to the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul, framed U.S. policy as trying to act as a “bridge” between Greece and Turkey and described Cyprus as a “key part” of any regional solution.
Barrack’s remarks came alongside a wider pitch for a new, prosperity-driven regional order stretching from the Caspian to the Mediterranean, an economic vision he suggested could help reduce political tensions that have long dogged the region. He also gave a specific timeline for another sensitive item in Greek-Turkish relations, saying the reopening of the Halki Theological School is targeted for September 2026, a detail many saw as a sign Washington is quietly engaged on several fronts.
the interview raises the probability of more U.S. involvement (in the longstanding division of Cyprus), mainly as a facilitator, but stops short of a U.S. takeover of the Cyprus issue.
What that means for Cyprus: a cautious opening, not a pledge
Barrack’s language is the kind diplomats use when signalling interest without announcing a formal plan. Saying Cyprus must be “included in the solution” signals Washington’s view that the island’s division cannot be ignored if broader Greek-Turkish or East-Med settlements are to hold, but it is not the same as a U.S. commitment to lead a new Cyprus peace process. His repeated talk of the United States acting as a “mortar” or “bridge” suggests the likely U.S. role would be one of diplomatic facilitation: convening talks, encouraging confidence-building measures, pushing economic linkages, and backing regional forums that bring stakeholders together.
How the U.S. could realistically engage, and the limits
If the U.S. does choose to lean in, it has a full toolkit at its disposal, from running quiet diplomacy between Ankara and Athens to pushing for broader regional talks that bring Cyprus into the room. Washington could also link economic incentives, like energy cooperation or investment packages, to political progress, or throw its weight behind the UN to reboot formal negotiations.
But for now, the signals from U.S. officials suggest early groundwork, not a fully fledged American rescue mission. And with analysts in Turkey already dissecting the possibility of a bigger U.S. footprint in the Eastern Mediterranean, any shift in Washington’s approach would be watched closely in both Ankara and Nicosia.
Bottom line: hope, but with caveats
Barrack’s phrasing will encourage those in Cyprus hoping for outside help, and it’s meaningful that a senior U.S. diplomat is explicitly naming the island as central to regional stability. Still, words are not a blueprint: what follows will matter, who Washington engages, whether Athens and Ankara accept U.S. convening, and whether leaders in Nicosia see a realistic path to meaningful talks. For now, the interview raises the probability of more U.S. involvement, mainly as a facilitator, but stops short of a U.S. takeover of the Cyprus issue.
