Speech by the General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL A. Kyprianou in the plenary House of Representatives debate on the 2019 State Budget

AKEL C.C. Press Office, 12 December 2018, Nicosia

Ten years after the outbreak of the global capitalist crisis, there are two trends in the global economy. Namely, the increasing shift to protectionism in international trade on the part of the US and the ongoing increase in income inequalities.

Developments themselves have refuted all those who blindly embraced the doctrine of “the end of history.” Developments are vindicating all of us who were issuing warnings about the plague and dangers arising from the neo-liberal model of development and “new world order”.

Looking at the results of the policies implemented at an international and European level, the “Oxfam” report published earlier this year is quite revealing about income inequality:

• In 2017, the biggest increase ever was recorded in the number of billionaires: a new billionaire was created every two days.
• Over the past year their wealth increased by $ 762 billion, an amount capable of tackling the extreme poverty worldwide seven times.
• 1% of the richest own more wealth than the remaining 99%. 61 people own as much wealth as 50% of the world’s poor.

Cyprus, during the Anastasiades-DISY government, is witnessing similar phenomena. The economy of the country is indeed registering growth. However, along with growth inequalities are also growing. The few and the privileged are seeing their profits swell and incomes increase. On the opposite pole, the majority of society continues to bear the brunt and consequences of the economic crisis. This is in fact the main characteristic of the State Budget for 2019. It is pursuing the same policies and philosophy as the previous ones. That is to say, a Budget without a rational plan for growth and with limited social sensitivity; a Budget without a vision and offering no prospect for the country. At the same time expenditure on development and social benefits remain at the reduced levels as in previous years.

The 2019 budget continues to prop up a social model characterized by the unfair distribution of wealth and the deregulation of labour relations; a model that, despite lowering the unemployment rate, is leading to deteriorating working conditions, cuts in wages, particularly in the private sector, to the conversion of permanent jobs into part-time and temporary jobs.

Mr. Anastasiades and DISY persist on supporting a bubble-generating economic model based on the recipes that led to the crisis. After 2016 total production recorded an upward trend. However, economic and social conditions continue to be difficult for a large section of society. The growth model is increasingly focused on short-term investments and measures. It is increasing the Cyprus economy’s dependence on external environment and international developments, leaving it vulnerable and prone to “bubble” phenomena. The economy of “golden passports” schemes and “easy money” is neither beneficial to the many, nor has it any future.

This year’s Budget is once again dominated by the government’s ideological and dogmatic obsessions. The government and ruling forces are insisting on the privatization of profitable semi-governmental organizations not out of any necessity, but out of dogmatic obsession. The government isn’t interested in rationalizing the functioning of these organizations. If this was indeed the objective, it would have modernized their legislative framework and the manner of appointing their Boards. What it is actually interested in is to sell off public property and assets.

The case of the port of Limassol is characteristic. In the last four years before its privatization, the Cyprus Ports Authority had disbursed to the state a dividend of EUR 89 million from its profits, while it had accumulated a reserve of approximately EUR 250 million. Today the Authority now has a black hole of almost 1 million Euros and it has run out of revenues due to the privatization of the Port. Revenues for the state are a great deal less than before, despite the government’s promises that it would be to the contrary.

It is the Anastasiades-DISY Government’s erroneous custom to abolish every social gain and shift the cost on to the people’s backs. The Cyprus Cooperative Bank is a case in point. Its closure didn’t happen by chance, but was planned through a criminal agreement that handed it – with state subsidy – over to the Hellenic Bank and burdened the billions of damage on society’s back.

The government’s handling of the Cooperative Bank issue besides scandalous was also incompetent, incoherent and utterly crude. For five whole years, they filled the people’s minds with big talk. They told us that professionalism has replaced amateurism; that all Bank’s goals are being fulfilled; that the most competent, the “best of the best”, are being appointed to various posts. We had in mind that they were favouring the friends, buddies and classmates of the Finance Minister.

As regards the remaining banks, the Government took care to provide other tools so that procedures for foreclosures and the sale of loans would move ahead with faster and immediate procedures. Despite the commitments it had made from time to time that it would support vulnerable borrowers, it proceeded in the end to draw up the “ESTIA” debt relief scheme. This scheme does not provide support to those in need, but instead indirectly subsidizes the banks. Even worse, it indirectly supports a section of the strategic bad-payers whom the government said it wanted to chase down. It is more than evident that the problems in the banking sector still exist. Unfortunately, we cannot trust the Government as to how it will tackle these issues, nor how it will handle the assets of the former Cyprus Co-operative Bank.

We will not stop reiterating that the Anastasiades-DISY Government has driven Cypriot society to the brink of disaster. We will continue to work both inside and outside the House of Representatives to prevent this downward path always seeking to continuously improve the standard of living of the majority of society.

The Anastasiades-DISY Government should make some minimal admissions even at this stage, if it does not want to deliver wreckage when it leaves office.

Firstly, those who it labelled as “the world’s best bankers” ruined the Cyprus economy with their criminal mistakes and scandalous handlings. Unfortunately, not only were these bankers not punished, but for the Government they didn’t even become an example to avoid.

Secondly, in order for the economy to flourish, it must be based on egalitarianism, justice and good governance in both the public and private sectors.

Thirdly, the economy must offer quality and permanent jobs and respect, protect and strengthen working people’s rights.

If this isn’t understood by the government and ruling forces, then they will plunge the country into even more socio-economic dead-ends.

Mr. Anastasiades’ announcements during the 2013 election campaign for reforms that would stamp out bureaucracy once and for all within six months of his election are only heard as a joke today. We all witnessed the fiasco of the reform of the Public Service. In the educational field, whatever step was taken during the Christofias governance was subsequently dismantled by the Anastasiades-DISY government. The reform of Local Government is still being studied. Reality itself confirms that no reform whatsoever which had been announced by the Anastasiades-DISY Government is progressing. That’s because it simply has no vision. It only has obsessions and fixations that it seeks to impose by all means, with authoritarianism and arrogance, characteristics that govern the whole philosophy of their administration.

The government’s ideological obsessions do not allow it to perceive health as a public right. Under their administration, public hospitals have hit rock bottom. Expenditure on the public health system is among the lowest across the European Union. The EU average is 7% of GDP, while in Cyprus it does not exceed 3%. In a country with a population of no more than one million, the Anastasiades-DISY government has managed to create insecurity, misery and queues of thousands of people waiting to receive care.

This is the result of the cuts amounting to hundreds of millions in the public health system. This is expenditure that is needed for patient care and for the autonomy in state hospitals.

In the face of this explosive situation, what is the government doing? Its content with engaging in communication games with the mass media. It wasn’t too long ago that Mr. Anastasiades was supposedly going to take action on the public health system and threatening to go to the very root of problems, as if he hadn’t been in power all through these previous years. What was the result? No action was taken whatsoever.

For yet another year, the relevant Ministry has not planned any substantial improvements. Namely, no investment in infrastructures and equipment for public state hospitals. Instead, minimum spending for their adequate staffing while they are in fact disintegrating. Nothing is being done to address the problem of waiting lists. As AKEL we consider that the National Health Scheme as the greatest social achievement of our times. We are proud of the role we have played in promoting it. We insist on its implementation. The Government must assume its responsibilities for its implementation and stop pretending that this responsibility lies with others.

It is obvious that some forces and circles are seeking behind the scenes and others openly to change the philosophy of the NHS, to lead it towards a multi-insurance plan. The Government has the responsibility to ensure its implementation, as it has been unanimously approved by the House of Representatives.

Recently, Mr. Anastasiades accused the opposition of living in “an ideal world” and that it “must wake up”. This statement can only be viewed with a smirk if one bears in mind that the Anastasiades-DISY government is living in some permanent virtual reality, dreaming that it has achieved some supposed “success story”.

Let’s start measuring its achievements, such as the unprecedented sloppiness and amateurism with which the Government handles important issues, shifting the cost on to society. One such example is the handling of the issue of the Cypriot state’s trademark on halloumi.

As regards the energy issue. The exploratory program for finding hydrocarbons by companies licensed in the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) has so far not yielded significant positive results. On the other hand, additional problems have arisen as a result of Turkey’s unacceptable behaviour. We also note the fact that the only confirmed reserve/deposit the Republic of Cyprus has is still untapped six years after its discovery.

Despite all this, we believe that a successful drilling by the Exxon Mobil – Qatar Petroleum Joint Venture will generate new conditions, boost the exploratory program by other companies too and facilitate the exploitation of existing and future confirmed deposits.

Judging from ongoing developments, it seems that AKEL’s position for the need to study the possible construction of a Natural Gas liquefaction terminal in Cyprus, making use of other reserves of the region is more relevant and timely than ever. Yet the Government hasn’t presented any plans for a comprehensive energy strategy. Everything that was achieved during the Christofias governance has been dismantled and since then the government and ruling forces have confined themselves to issuing empty words and no practical works.

With regards society itself.

When was the last time the government and ruling forces visited public state hospitals and workplaces?

When was the last time someone briefed them about the scale or, rather, the low level of the minimum wage, the cost of living, the price of the rent, and the homeless?

Across the European Union, roughly 20% of expenditure is allocated to social protection. In Cyprus it is less than 14%. During Mr. Anastasiades’ governance, Cyprus has fallen to the countries of the European Union with the biggest increase in poverty. The percentage of working poor, that is to say households on very low-incomes unable to repay bills and loans, has more than doubled in recent years. Labour relations have literally been undermined. The government pretends it doesn’t understand that a large section of the people is working with a salary below the minimum wage, on contracts and without insurance.

In 2013, Mr. Anastasiades promised that a new promising day would come. In 2018, Cyprus, whose population is no bigger than a neighborhood of Athens, now has homeless people. While rents have risen by up to 50%, the Unified Housing Plan remains in the government’s drawers. As regards the housing of refugees in 2018 just 56% of the funds were absorbed, while those for the countryside are constantly being curbed.

Young couples cannot begin their lives because no government plan exists for their housing. The only thing the government has done was to announce a 10% increase in rent allowance only for refugees. That’s about 50 Euros. That’s a mockery.

The Anastasiades-DISY Government is not interested in people, it simply cares about figures and numbers. It has no vision for social policy, no concern for the wages being cut, for the bad conditions working people face.

We repeat some of our proposals. We wish the Anastasiades government would put aside its class blinkers and reflect on them:

1. Legislative regulation of employers’ obligation to apply collective labour agreements.
2. Safeguarding of minimum employment conditions for those workers who are not covered by collective agreements in order to tackle the phenomenon of the working poor.
3. Family policy measures to provide support to young low-paid couples.
4. Investment by the state in social protection infrastructures and support for local government to implement social policy.
5. Study to abolish the 12% penalty on pensions on low-pensions and workers employed in arduous and unhealthy jobs.
6. Creation of a new separate legislation for people with disabilities in line with the principles of the UN Convention on Disabled People.
7. Increase in the amount of rent allowance granted to people on Minimum Guaranteed Income and to refugees in a manner that is in line with current conditions.
8. Elaboration of a rent subsidy scheme for families on low income.
9. Restoration of the housing programs that have been abolished for refugees and local inhabitants to acquire a house. Re-activation of the programs of the Cyprus Development Agency for the creation of social housing projects.

If the Government really believes in what it says, namely, that it recognises the sacrifices made by the people in tackling the consequences of the crisis then it has a lot do. Let them reciprocate the people even now.

Unfortunately, education too hasn’t been spared of the government obsessions. The government’s biggest crime is that for six whole years it did absolutely nothing for Special Education. The policies for people with disabilities are not some policy option for any given government; it is a debt and an obligation. As AKEL, we submitted a comprehensive proposal on Special Education. The government completely ignored it. They didn’t even bother to formulate their own policy. In our country, we are witnesses to daily human tragedies suffered by children with disabilities due to the government’s refusal to modernize and enhance Special Education.

When will the lights from the eccentric galas organized in the presidential gardens and the charity cosmic fiestas illuminate these daily tragedies in the hope of making the government sensitive to this plight?

When will they address the pressing substantial problems education is facing and stop creating more problems?

– Exams every four months will downgrade the real role that schools must play while thousands of students and parents suffer unbelievable misfortune and costs.

– Evening Lyceums and Evening Technical Schools remain abandoned in specifications of a bygone era.

– Many schools face serious logistical problems due to the severe cuts that have been imposed from 2013 onwards, with Technical Education the biggest victim.

– No serious measures have been taken at the moment as regards safety and health issues in schools,

– Research and innovation are very low among the government’s priorities.

– About 300 teachers who worked last year in our schools have lost their jobs because of Government decisions. At the same time, teachers who were working according to the purchase of services system at the State Educational Institutes, music and sports lyceums, evening and afternoon classes, All-Day Schools and Post-Graduate Institutes of Vocational Education and Training remain high and dry.

– The New Appointee System has victimized thousands of young graduates, crushing their dreams for dignified work.

– Student care has been taken to pieces and forced thousands of students to drop out of their studies.

– As regards culture, where does one start? The depressive funds the government allocated for it confirms that it considers culture and the arts of secondary importance. Arts and Letters, theatre, cinema, state libraries and other infrastructure projects do not appear in this year’s budget of the Ministry of Education and Culture.

In view of all the above, the vote for or rejection of the budget does not just mean support or disapproval of the Anastasiades-DISY government. It demonstrates a clear political stand. We call on all forces, both inside and outside Parliament, to take a position. Without hypocrisy, sophistications and evasions to take a stand against rising poverty, growing inequalities, the shrinking of the middle strata, unequal distribution of wealth, deregulation of labour relations, and the downgrading of people’s everyday life.

There is, however, one area in which the Anastasiades-DISY Government excels – the field of corruption, interwoven interests and scandals. It is trying to disguise its responsibilities by claiming that cases of interwoven interests and corruption are being taken to court for the first time.

Does the government forget that it has strongly clashed with the two institutions that have promoted various cases for investigation? That is to say it has clashed with the Attorney General and the Auditor-General.

One of the scandals that the country will remember for decades is the appointment of Mr. Rikkos Erotokritou as Assistant Attorney General. This was an appointment that was of utmost importance because at that time there was no Attorney General.

From Mr. Erotokritou society was expecting justice to be delivered. Mr. Anastasiades appointed him because he had to fulfill a pre-election promise. Eventually, the one that was supposed to deliver justice, was the one sentenced to imprisonment with heavy charges despite the fact that Nikos Anastasiades himself defended Mr. Erotokritou in court.

Outflows of deposits abroad before the haircut on bank deposits by the family circle of the President. Land-plots with favourable terms given to the family of the President by the Archbishop. Family businesses that are active in the real estate sector and the sale of passports in a scandalous way, which all of Cyprus is discussing. Plans for investment in the birthplace of the President, all by accident in plots that happen to belong to the President’s family. The case of the contract of Mrs. Chrystalla Giorkatzi. Leaks in examinations of appointments. Cronyism and “jobs for the boys” from Cyprus’ delegations in Brussels up to the Cooperative Bank. Town planning deviations favouring big businessmen. Leakage of confidential documents by the President of the Republic himself to the mass media. Errors in the contracts for the privatization of the Limassol port that have cost the state millions of euros. Promotions of police officers even though disciplinary and criminal investigations are pending against them. The police itself informing suspects that Interpol is looking for them. Consecutive suicides and rapes committed in prisons and of course the biggest scandal of them all that fully bears the stamp of the Anastasiades-DISY government: the taking over of the Cyprus Cooperative Bank and its subsequent dissolution.

The Cyprus problem

I have left the Cyprus problem at the end of my speech. The principal issue for our country; a matter of life or death for our people. We want to see our country reunified. We do not want our children and grandchildren to live with the danger of a new war looming. We consider the Turkish Cypriots who want a solution too as our natural allies in this struggle.

The Turkish occupation is a source of permanent instability for Cyprus, the Cypriot people and the wider region. The longer time goes by without a solution of the Cyprus problem, the colonization of the occupied areas by Turkey increasingly threatens the future of both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. Turkey is promoting the economic integration of the occupied areas through its economic intervention in a number of areas. It seeks to constantly interfere in the occupied territories. It seeks to harness religion as a means of exercising greater control over society. It continues the military control of the Turkish Cypriot community.

The progressive forces of the Turkish Cypriots are resisting, but we must not have any illusions. A small community like the Turkish Cypriot community cannot resist forever the might of Turkey. If the Greek Cypriot Right-wing and the ultra-right do not understand these realities by now, they will hut Cyprus for the second time – but this time irretrievably.

“Cyprus is at a turning point. Either we will draw lessons from the past and unify Cyprus through a federal solution, or we will render partition permanent and one day the island will be annexed to Turkey and Greece through double Enosis.

Since 1974 there is a specific process underway in the north of Cyprus… With the aim of eradicating the Cypriot character of north Cyprus, people have been transported and are being transported from outside. The economic policies that are being transported from Turkey are provoking the collapse of the community and the destruction of our community’s values. An entire community’s existence is being murdered, the identity of a whole community is being murdered …Will we perhaps remain apathetic watching our homeland pass to a different owner or will we declare “This country is ours!” and defend it?”

This excerpt from Ozger Ozgur in 1989 summarises the dilemmas that the Cyprus problem puts before us.

The invasion, occupation and continued colonization directly threaten the survival of the Cypriot people, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots alike, on the land that gave birth to them. Nationalism and chauvinism are spreading their poison in precise doses aiming to perpetuate the division and serve the goal of partition.

History will judge Mr. Anastasiades very strictly, not only because he did not resolutely oppose nationalism and chauvinism by conveying coherent political messages, but also because of the tactics he is following, he is facilitating nationalism and chauvinism. Even from 2011 onwards, the frenzy and hysteria cultivated throughout Cypriot society with the tolerance – if not with the encouragement – of the governing DISY party and others, targeted the Cyprus problem. Back then the government and DISY opened doors that never closed. So no one should be surprised at the incidents of nationalism in schools, with the attacks waged against Turkish Cypriots, with the growth of the ultra-right. Our misfortune is that Mr. Anastasiades, DISY and others think that if they continue to appease and caress the monster, they will somehow tame it and that it will do them favours.

Mr. Anastasiades inherited the Cyprus problem from D. Christofias with joint communiqués that safeguarded long-standing positions of our side, with many issues agreed and recorded as convergences; with the chapter of energy with huge prospects and the sovereign rights of the Republic of Cyprus safeguarded; with the international community acknowledging that our side was one step ahead in its readiness to solve the problem.

What did Mr. Anastasiades do and to what situation has he led the Cyprus problem to?

Yes, it is indeed a fact that the primary responsibility for the continuation of the de facto partition lies with Turkey, because of its intransigent positions, aggressiveness and provocation.

This does not exonerate and relieve Mr. Anastasiades of the mistakes and amateur handlings he has made. Recent examples include the Mont Peleran and Crans Montana conferences. It is not enough to state our version of events in Cyprus that Turkey was the one responsible for the collapse of the negotiations. Unfortunately, the UN and the European Union do not share this narrative. The Secretary-General of the United Nations in his report submitted in September 2017, relives Turkey of responsibilities by saying that he ascertained Turkey’s readiness to cooperate in order to overcome disagreements and reach an agreement. In contrast, as far as the Greek Cypriot side is concerned, he found a lack of political will.

If the Government believes that our narrative is correct why then didn’t it protest at that time?

Why did it keep quiet?

After the bitter good night he addressed to “northerners and southerners” the UN Secretary General Mr. Guterres called on the two sides to think about what they want. He essentially demanded the continuation of the negotiation procedure from the point where it had remained at Crans Montana on the basis of the convergences that had been achieved, the Guterres Framework and the informal document on the implementation of the agreement.

With regards the procedure he has said that we should continue with negotiations on two tables. One to discuss security and guarantees and the other the internal aspects of the Cyprus problem. He called for the composition to be similar to Crans Montana. Finally, he wanted the two sides to convince him that this time they would have the political will to go all the way.

Does the Guterres Framework shield us or should we worry about its provisions?

Mr. Anastasiades himself said that it would be insane if he were to reject it. The Framework abolishes the existing guarantees and any intervention rights. It provides for the drastic reduction of the occupation troops from day one of the solution, as well as for the rapid withdrawal of the rest. It provides for a mechanism to implement the solution, from which it excludes the guarantor powers and restricts them only to an advisory role. It leaves the issue of the Greek Force in Cyprus ELDYK and the Turkish Force in Cyprus TOURDYK (950 and 650 soldiers respectively) open for further discussion, with Turkey calling for a review clause in 15 years and the Greek Cypriot side for a clause terminating their presence in much less years. The above represent a significant improvement even with regards the Zurich agreements: The big thorny issue, namely the Treaty of Guarantee, is terminated and even in the worst case scenario for us, the Treaty of Alliance is transformed from indefinite into a fixed specific time.

As far as territory is concerned, the Guterres Framework calls for the return of Morphou. This means that the Turkish Cypriot side must not only bring back the map it had withdrawn, but add Morphou to it as well.

On the issue of the equal treatment of Greek and Turkish citizens, the Framework simply refers to equal treatment, which leaves room for negotiation, with the Christofias – Talat convergence for a population ratio of 4: 1 representing our important weapon.

As to the issue of effective participation, the Framework meets our concerns, given the fact that for bodies dealing with secondary political issues it refers to a positive Turkish-Cypriot vote, with a mechanism for solving deadlocks, only on issues concerning the vital interests of the two communities. That is to say, what Anastasiades supposedly wants to safeguard with decentralized Federation is already in place.

With regards property, the UN Secretary General proposes two different regimes, something which was the aim of the Greek Cypriot side. In the areas to be returned under Greek Cypriot administration, priority will be given to displaced owners. As far as other areas are concerned, users will be given priority. The latter obviously relates to the ECHR’s Demopoulos decision, which, unfortunately, indeed gives priority to users. It is certainly something that does not satisfy us, but at least the Framework explicitly offers the possibility for further negotiation. In addition, the convergence according to which even in the non-returning areas priority will be given to those owners who have an emotional connection to their property must also be taken into account.

Let’s not be naive. No framework can and will not fully satisfy our positions. What we need to see is whether, for the most part, its provisions are in line with our long-standing positions and our just demands. We reply, yes it does.

As far as Mr. Anastasiades’ proposal for decentralized federation is concerned, we are not opposed to it from a position of principle. But we are wondering why Mr. Anastasiades has put it forth at this precise moment. He had every opportunity to raise issues during the discussions on the Guterres Framework.

Why didn’t he wait to do it there?

Why has he opened a closed issue?

Does he realise that this move is disorienting the attempt to resume the negotiations?

Does he comprehend that it does not solve any problem, but instead opens up more issues?

That he is ready to make concessions without any rewards?

Worst of all is that so far he hasn’t specified what decentralized federation actually means. We are concerned about this secrecy because there are competences that if they were to be transferred to the constituent states then we will not be talking about a federation, but rather about a confederation or to say the least about strong confederal elements such as on the issue of defense and defense policy, a single economy, an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and immigration.

We reiterate that the rumor that Mr. Anastasiades is moving in other directions is being heard loudly from many sides. Take the statements made by the Deputy Chairman of the “Citizens’ Alliance” party, the public admission made by the Government Spokesman, various press reports and articles that have never been denied, and the cry of despair by former Anastasiades Minister of Interior Mr. Hasikos that we should make our minds up about what we want which DISY President Mr. Averof Neophytou made viral. The phrase “national tsunami” of Mr. Neophytou himself.

Unfortunately, Mr. Anastasiades’ untrustworthy handlings on the Cyprus problem and all the confusion they have caused have made the solution of the Cyprus problem much more difficult. Whereas we had a clear framework before us for a resumption of the negotiations, now it is being demanded that terms of reference should be agreed

That is to say they are asking for something more; that we should agree we have the same understanding of where we are and as to where we want to go and how we go there.

Developments are now more than critical. What is at stake is to make use of the narrow margin we have to agree on the terms of reference.

Does Mr. Anastasiades realize that if we don’t manage to do so, then there is a danger of responsibilities being assigned on our side too?

Does he understand that the definitive partition will be closer than ever before?

As AKEL we will never agree to a confederation or a two-state solution. Nor will we ever agree to a solution that some forces and circles will try to present as a federation, but one that in fact will have another content. We will never make Rauf Denktash’s vision a reality. That would be committing a political crime. Betrayal.

As AKEL we will continue to struggle with all our forces for the liberation and reunification of our common homeland. The only feasible way to fulfill this goal is our persistence on the agreed framework; on the solution of bicommunal, bizonal federation.

A solution based on the principles of International Law and the UN Charter, the relevant UN resolutions, the High-Level Agreements and the principles upon which the European Union was founded.

A solution leading to a united state, a continuation of the Republic of Cyprus.

A united state with a single sovereignty, a single citizenship and a single international personality with political equality as prescribed by the UN.

A solution that will rid us of the occupation and the possibility of any power/force and, above all, Turkey to intervene in our internal affairs.

I’ll make a side comment to say that we do not agree with the view that the specific framework for the solution of the Cyprus problem has failed. On the contrary, what has failed has been the contradictory handlings of Mr. Anastasiades. Any attempt to reject a federal solution or change tactics will lead us with mathematical certainty to partition.

Therefore whether partition is agreed at the table, or as a result of the passage of time without any substantive negotiations, the outcome will be the same. The one who dares to open the door to this nightmare scenario should also have the courage to come out openly and explain to the people what partition would actually mean.

The Turkish Cypriot community will be completely assimilated by Turkey and will disappear as an entity. 40% of the land and 60% of the coastline, hence a corresponding share of the EEZ, will be granted to Turkey. We will have a border with Turkey within our own homeland. The settlers will all stay and multiply over time. Partition would mean giving our lands and property once and for all to Turkey. It means our children and grandchildren living with the permanent threat of the total occupation of Cyprus by Turkey.

Consequently Cyprus will not “Turkified” if the Cyprus problem is solved. Cyprus will indeed be “Turkified” if the Cyprus problem is not solved. Either we will be able to reunite Cyprus with the solution of bi-zonal bicommunal federation, or we will be left with partition. We will not stop repeating it, we will not refrain from insisting that Cyprus can and must reunite. The agony of our people, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots for survival, peace and reunification is our own anxiety too.

We regret the attempt by Mr. Anastasiades to present AKEL that it supposedly agrees with any solution. When I raised the issue at the session of the National Council he replied by saying that he never said such a thing. Luckily, the minutes of the National Council have recorded everything that was said and refute/disclaim what Anastasiades is saying in public.

His stand is a clear defense of his inability to reply to the essence of our criticism. He accuses us of supporting any solution, the same President who is the only one that flirted openly with the idea of ​​confederation and a two states solution. He is accusing us – the very person who at one time was himself protesting that others were supposedly creating a prevailing atmosphere against him.

We support the same positions today as we were doing two years ago. Back then the President was saying that AKEL is a patriotic party. Today he says we are supporters of any solution. Let him think about what he was saying back then and what he is saying today. If he does so, it won’t be difficult for him to draw a safe conclusion as to who has indeed changed – for one more time.

They insist, however, on invoking unity, accusing AKEL of undermining it with its stand. Unity means an understanding around common principles and objectives and consistency to the long-standing positions of the National Council. It is precisely these principles, goals and positions that Mr. Anastasiades has abandoned, damaging unity.

Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots will neutralize once and for all what threatens our survival only when we manage to live together in a federation. Only when we start to lay the foundations of our common life, common social and political action. That is why we have always approached federation as an arena of creative cooperation of equal partners and compatriots. This of course does not mean that the historical relations of the two communities with Greece and Turkey are being deleted. It does however mean that our people, all Cypriots, can manage our own lives and affairs without any guardians; that Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots will be emancipated and will be able to work together for their common future.

No matter how many words and speeches are made, no matter how many arguments we put forward, they lead to the dilemma that Ozger Ozgur put before us in 1974; the dilemma that life puts before us. Everything concludes in the following dilemma: “Will we remain apathetic watching our homeland pass to a different owner or will we declare “This country is ours!” and defend it”?

I admit that I often wonder whether the political spectrum that created the Cyprus problem in the first place will succeed in or wants to solve it.

Whether the political spectrum that created the Cyprus problem remembers that it was damning and cursing AKEL’s views during the 1950’s and eventually led us to the Zurich agreements.

Whether it remembers that it was also blaspheming AKEL’s views in the 1960’s and drove the country into the blood shed in the bi-communal clashes.

Whether it recalls that it was damning AKEL’s views in the 1970’s, took up arms to impose its own views and plunged half of Cyprus into devastation and filled the other half of Cyprus with refugees uprooted from their homes.

If it has learnt anything from our country’s modern history, it should address a symbolic apology to our people for all the suffering it has caused as a result of its ideological dogmatism, fanaticism and petty-party obsessions and work honestly and consistently for the salvation of Cyprus.

If not, it should remember that History always makes the final judgement and we all of us be judged eventually.