This article suggests that the conflict has two major causes. Overcoming these requires not only more interest on the part of each community in reaching a settlement, but also change in their perceptions of their interest, both areas in which the United Nations can do little. One major cause of the current deadlock is that inter-communal hostilites, especially in the post-World War II era, have increasing antagonized the two communities, who have historically identified themselves as part of the mainland Greek and Turkish nations. Second, the definition of the post-1974, if not of the post-1964, characteristics of a reunified Cyprus by each side does not leave much room for compromise. Examination of the respective proposals of the parties regarding a settlement shows that the protagonists have wide-ranging differences. An examination of the United Nations' role in the Cyprus crisis between 1954 and 1996 will show that these two causes have significantly narrowed the organization's room for maneuvering. Moreover, the difficulties inherent in the United Nations' mediation role - including no-holds-barred public debate and formal voting - drastically hampered the UM diplomacy until the end of Secretary-General Bourtros Boutros-Ghali's mandate. This article will also discuss how the major stumbling blocks to a mediated settlement emerged over time and why the parties have been reluctant to agree to a compromise.
