This paper explores whether Northern Cyprus is unfairly excluded or misrepresented in major international measurements of democratic quality.
It begins by outlining the concept of democracy indices—such as Polity IV, Freedom House, the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index, V-Dem, and the Democracy Barometer—which aim to quantify the level of democracy in different countries. The author argues that while these indices claim to promote fairness, equality, and transparency, they fail to include non-recognized states like Northern Cyprus, thus creating a form of ethnic or political discrimination.
After providing a brief historical overview of Cyprus—its division in 1974 into a Greek-speaking south and a Turkish-speaking north—the paper compares how these indices treat the island. The author highlights that most datasets only list “Cyprus,” implicitly referring to the Republic of Cyprus, while Northern Cyprus remains invisible. This omission, according to the paper, reflects political bias and the influence of international recognition rather than objective data collection.
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
CYPRUS’ BRIEF HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF THE HISTORY INTO THE QUALITY OF DEMOCRACY MEASUREMENTS
COMPARISION OF NORTHERN CYPRUS IN YEARS OF 2020 AND 2021 IN THE INDEX OF FREEDOM HOUSE
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Research Objectives and Key Topics
The primary objective of this research is to investigate and criticize the systematic exclusion and potential discrimination against Northern Cyprus within international quality of democracy indices. The paper analyzes how the lack of formal international recognition leads to the omission of this territory from major democratic measurements, thereby failing to provide an accurate representation of the democratic reality for its inhabitants.
- The role and development of quality of democracy measurements globally.
- The impact of international legal recognition on data representation in democracy indices.
- Comparative analysis of how major indices (Polity IV, EIU, V-Dem) handle the case of Northern Cyprus.
- A detailed look at Freedom House as an exception in reporting on non-recognized territories.
- The correlation between political pressure and scoring fluctuations in democracy indices.
Excerpt from the Book
CYPRUS’ BRIEF HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF THE HISTORY INTO THE QUALITY OF DEMOCRACY MEASUREMENTS
Cyprus is an island nation, which suited in the Eastern Mediterranean. With its geographical advantage and at the same time disadvantage, many ethnic groups conquered and settled in the island throughout the history. After the Ottoman rule, Cyprus was in the hands of British Empire. The ethnic population of the island was mainly Greek-speaking and Turkish- speaking with minorities from Levant, who they speak Arabic and also Armenian-Cypriots and Latin-Cypriots. After the foundation of the Republic of Cyprus, in 1963, the two groups Turkish-speaking and Greek-speaking started to fight against with each other and conflict arose. In 1983, Turkish speaking Cypriots created their own state, nowadays known as Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and the state is only recognised by Turkey.
Having different identities and different ideologies led to the two different countries on the island. This division is not the only example in the world. We can also see the division of the same people into two countries in the world. For example, Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. The northern part of the Ireland belongs to other country, namely, UK. And in the indices, we can find the general data of the UK, also including Northern Ireland. We can also find Republic of Ireland in the indices as a separate country. No index can exclude Northern Ireland in the democracy measurements.
The republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland is known worldwide. The Cyprus issue is not a solved issue in the international laws. And because of this, when there is a mention of Cyprus, people refer to Republic of Cyprus. When they want to indicate the Northern part, they always need to distinguish it from the Republic of Cyprus by saying Northern Cyprus. From this, we can indicate that in the indices we must find two Cyprus. The reason why we have this differentiation if because of the discrimination towards Turkish-speaking Cypriots and their country/territory.
Summary of Chapters
INTRODUCTION: This chapter introduces the evolution of democracy measurements and argues that the current methodology suffers from bias by excluding non-recognized states like Northern Cyprus.
CYPRUS’ BRIEF HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF THE HISTORY INTO THE QUALITY OF DEMOCRACY MEASUREMENTS: This section details the historical context of the island's division and compares the treatment of Northern Cyprus in international indices with other global examples of divided territories.
COMPARISION OF NORTHERN CYPRUS IN YEARS OF 2020 AND 2021 IN THE INDEX OF FREEDOM HOUSE: This chapter analyzes Freedom House data for Northern Cyprus to demonstrate how political pressure and external interference influence democratic scoring.
CONCLUSION: The paper concludes that the omission of non-recognized states from democracy indices reflects a political bias that undermines the global effort to foster democracy and equality.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lists the sources and datasets used, including reports from Freedom House, Polity IV, and the Economist Intelligence Unit.
Keywords
Northern Cyprus, Democracy, Democracy Indices, Discrimination, Non-recognition, Political Rights, Freedom House, Polity IV, Economist Intelligence Unit, V-Dem, Human Rights, International Law, Social Exclusion, Democratic Measurement, Political Pluralism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the potential discrimination and bias present in international quality of democracy indices regarding the representation of Northern Cyprus.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The study covers the history of Cyprus, the methodology of democracy measurements, the impact of international recognition on data collection, and the comparison of specific index reports.
What is the central research question?
The research seeks to determine whether the non-recognition of Northern Cyprus under international law leads to its unfair exclusion or non-measurement in global democracy indices.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author utilizes a qualitative case study approach, comparing data from various indices like Polity IV, EIU, and V-Dem to illustrate the lack of representation.
What does the main body of the work address?
It addresses the historical background of Cyprus, provides a comparative analysis of how various indices handle the territory, and highlights Freedom House as a notable exception to the exclusion trend.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Northern Cyprus, Democracy indices, Political bias, Non-recognition, and Democratic measurement.
How does the author explain the difference between the treatment of Northern Ireland and Northern Cyprus?
The author argues that while Northern Ireland is included in UK data and globally recognized, the lack of status for Northern Cyprus causes indices to ignore it, resulting in systematic discrimination.
Why is the Freedom House index considered an exception in this study?
Unlike other major indices, Freedom House includes Northern Cyprus as a separate entry, allowing for an analysis of its political rights and civil liberties despite its status.
What conclusion does the author reach regarding the transparency of democracy indices?
The author concludes that indices claiming to be transparent and democratic in their methodology fail to meet these standards when they exclude non-recognized social groups and territories.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Özden Bulutbeyaz (Autor:in), 2021, Is There Any Discrimination Towards Northern Cyprus in the Quality of Democracy Indices?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1669779
