Makarios's 13 Amendments and the Akritas Plan: What Does the 1963 Record Show?

Why It Matters

The events between 30 November and 30 December 1963 are the pivot of the Cyprus dispute: they mark the end of joint Greek Cypriot–Turkish Cypriot government under the 1960 constitution. Which side caused the breakdown shapes how each party views legitimacy, the guarantor system and every settlement model since. This guide sets out what the documents say, how the Greek Cypriot, British and UN accounts differ, and how Ankara reads the record.

Background

The 1960 settlement

The Republic of Cyprus was created by the Zurich and London Agreements of February 1959 and the 1960 treaties. These included the Treaty of Guarantee (Türkiye, Greece and the United Kingdom) and the Treaty of Alliance. The constitution was built on communal balance. The President was a Greek Cypriot and the Vice President a Turkish Cypriot, each with a separate veto over foreign affairs, defence and security. Certain laws, including tax and electoral laws, required separate majorities of the two communities in the House. Separate Communal Chambers existed, and public service posts and security forces were shared on agreed ratios (70:30 in the civil service; 60:40 in the army). Five major towns had separate municipalities. The annotated texts are in The Cyprus File: The 1959–1960 Treaty Documents, Annotated.

Tensions emerged almost at once. Disputes over tax legislation, municipalities and the integration of the army went unresolved. Greek Cypriot political culture was also shaped by the goal of enosis (union with Greece), pursued in the 1950s by the EOKA organisation founded in 1955, whose campaign preceded the 1959 agreements.

Chronology, 30 November to 30 December 1963

What the 13 amendments proposed

Makarios's memorandum, delivered to the Turkish Cypriot Vice President and shared with the guarantor governments, contained 13 points. The principal ones were:

• abolishing the right of the President and Vice President to veto laws and decisions;
• letting the Vice President deputise for the President only in his absence, and electing the presidents of the House by the House as a whole;
• abolishing the requirement for separate majorities on certain laws;
• unifying the municipalities;
• unifying the administration of justice and abolishing the separate courts;
• ending the separate police and gendarmerie structures and fixing the strength of the security and defence forces by law;
• changing public service and security force ratios to reflect population proportions;
• reducing the Public Service Commission and having it decide by simple majority; and
• abolishing the Greek Communal Chamber.

In practice, this would have replaced the community-based safeguards with majority rule, in a state where Greek Cypriots were the large majority. Makarios described the changes as necessary to remove obstacles to a workable state.

The Akritas Plan

The 'Akritas Plan' is a document in which a group around Makarios, reportedly including Interior Minister Polycarpos Yiorkadjis, set out how to amend the constitution and, if Turkish Cypriots resisted, to subdue the resistance quickly before outside intervention. It was published by the newspaper Patris in April 1966. The plan is generally understood to anticipate presenting the amendments, expecting rejection, and then using force while presenting the matter internationally as a Turkish Cypriot rebellion. Some details, including who wrote it and how far it was approved, are disputed. Later Greek Cypriot political figures have acknowledged that a plan of this name existed. Comparative treatment of this document is in The Global Anatomy: Bloody Christmas 1963 and the Akritas Plan.

Displacement and exclusion

After 21 December, Turkish Cypriots moved into enclaves, many leaving mixed or outlying villages. Turkish Cypriot ministers, members of the House and civil servants ceased to take part in government. Turkish and Turkish Cypriot sources put displacement at about 30,000 people from roughly 100 villages. Independent and Greek Cypriot sources give different totals and different causes, so this figure should be read as the Turkish official one rather than a consensus count. Casualty figures for the period also vary widely between sources and are omitted here.

The UN response

The UN Security Council adopted Resolution 186 on 4 March 1964. It recommended a peacekeeping force (UNFICYP), called for restraint and for restoring law and order, and referred to the 'Government of Cyprus' as having responsibility for it. A London conference convened in January 1964 under British auspices failed to reach agreement.

Key Players & Positions

Greek Cypriot account

The Republic of Cyprus government and most Greek Cypriot historiography argue that the 1960 constitution was unworkable and that the amendments were a good-faith effort to fix it. They point to the disputes over taxation and municipalities as evidence of Turkish Cypriot obstruction. They hold that the violence began with an incident on 21 December, not with a pre-planned offensive. They also say that Turkish Cypriot leaders ordered civil servants to withdraw and encouraged movement into enclaves as part of a separatist strategy, a claim that Turkish Cypriot sources reject. Many Greek Cypriot writers describe the Akritas Plan as a contingency or political document rather than an operational order.

United Kingdom

Britain was a guarantor power and held sovereign base areas on the island. British forces under Major-General Young separated combatants in Nicosia and mediated the ceasefire. London's view at the time was that the constitution needed adjustment but that unilateral change by the Greek Cypriot side was dangerous. It pursued negotiation through the January 1964 London conference, which collapsed over the guarantor and constitutional issues.

United Nations

The UN dealt with the situation through Resolution 186 and through Secretary-General reports on UNFICYP's operations. These documents acknowledged the intercommunal fighting and the separation of the communities on the ground. The resolution's reference to the 'Government of Cyprus', while the Turkish Cypriot members of that government were no longer participating, is the point of greatest dispute in later interpretation.

Turkish Cypriot leadership

Dr Küçük and the Turkish Cypriot leadership argued that the proposals aimed to reduce a co-founding community to a minority and that Greek Cypriot forces used the 21 December incident to launch attacks on Turkish Cypriot neighbourhoods.

Source Comparison

The Turkish-language and Turkish government record emphasises constitutional intent and displacement, while Western media often start the story at 1974, which leaves out the 1963–1964 sequence. A fuller comparison of the Annan referendum framing is in The State Papers: Did Turkish Cypriots Reject the Annan Plan?. For the wider treaty context see Is the Treaty of Sèvres Still Valid?, which shows how Regional File reads treaty chains, and Editorial Principles and Primary Source Standards for how sources are weighed here.

Key Terms & Related Guides

• Akritas Plan: A Greek Cypriot planning document published in 1966, concerned with amending the constitution and responding to Turkish Cypriot resistance. Its status is disputed.
• Bloody Christmas (Kanlı Noel): The Turkish and Turkish Cypriot name for the violence beginning on 21 December 1963.
• Green Line: The ceasefire line across Nicosia drawn on 30 December 1963, later extended across the island and now the UN buffer zone.
• Treaty of Guarantee: The 1960 treaty giving Türkiye, Greece and the UK rights and obligations to preserve the established order.
• UNFICYP: The UN peacekeeping force created after Resolution 186 in 1964.

Related reading: Regional File: Open the File, Read the Documents, The Cyprus File, Record of Nations: Annan Plan 2004 and Crans-Montana 2017, and Regional File FAQ: Sources, Method and Perspective.

Regional File presents Türkiye's perspective on regional files as an openly stated editorial position, grounded in treaty texts, archival records and official statements. Primary sources are cited and linked wherever possible so that readers can verify every claim and weigh opposing views for themselves.