Interview with Giorgos Loucaides, AKEL Political Bureau member and AKEL Parliamentary Representative
13th June 2021, ‘Haravgi’ newspaper
“The proposal for an all-party government is a communication trick, which clashes with the Anastasiades-DISY government’s toxic policies and practices”
Q: Certain forces/circles, from both sides of the barbed wire of division, are commenting that the election result sends out a message that the solution of Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation is not supported by the majority of the people. What is your reading of the result?
GL: The numbers don’t confirm this. ELAM, EDEK, Solidarity and Citizens’ Alliance, which are openly opposed to the solution of Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation, have lost percentages overall. On the other hand, the increase in the percentage recorded by the “Golden Dawn” of Cyprus, (ELAM), is particularly worrying. In any case, the relevant research shows that the majority of our people support the perspective of a solution of Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation, as the only option which can liberate and reunite our homeland and people.
We stress again that the real dilemma we face is between Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation and the final partition of our homeland. Therefore, what is demanded is that the efforts to prepare our people for such a solution must be intensified. The biggest task, of course, falls on the shoulders of the government, which not only does not cultivate such a culture of a solution of the Cyprus problem, but instead undermines it.
Q: Does the rise of ELAM create dynamics for the partition de facto situation to remain as the ‘second best solution?
GL: We clarify once again that partition cannot be considered in any way as the second best solution because to put it very simply the finalization of the partition of Cyprus will be the beginning of new, worse troubles for the whole of Cyprus. As I have mentioned, the rise of ELAM harbors dangers at various levels and sectors of political life and society. As long as the government continues to maintain ELAM as its far-right reserve force and contributes to the “normalization” of this Nazi formation, without any doubt the dangers are increasing in this direction too.
Q: How do you respond to the President’s call for the formation of an “all-party government” to “move forward together for our country”? Is his move aimed at “investing” in the 2023 Presidential?
GL: This move is a communication trick, which clashes with the toxic policies and practices being pursued by the Anastasiades-DISY government. A trick that obviously serves the present and future considerations of the ruling DISY party and the President of the Republic in view of the 2023 Presidential elections. For that reason, AKEL has already responded negatively to this communication trick of the government.
A divide separates us from the DISY-Anastasiades government and consequently only through the complete reversal and change in government policies and practices can preconditions be created for a broader consensus, which will enable the promotion of progressive reforms or other measures that will serve the people and move the country forward.
Q: If the President’s credibility has been damaged by his regressions on the Cyprus problem, can you trust him if he states that the Cyprus problem will be a national priority in the period remaining until the end of his presidential term?
GL: At no stage over the past eight years have we trusted Nikos Anastasiades on the handling of the Cyprus problem. Even when we have been supporting the procedure to solve the Cyprus problem for a specific time, we publicly stated that we don’t trust him. We repeat the self-evident. If this wasn’t our approach, whenever the negotiator of the Greek Cypriot community was not a person elected by AKEL, we would have to reject from the very outset every effort to solve the Cyprus problem. Consequently, as in all other cases in the past, so today too, any handlings on the Cyprus problem will be judged by their content.
To the extent that the President of the Republic will act within the framework that we as AKEL have proposed, our stand will be constructive. And vice versa of course. We will continue to be harshly critical if he continues to pursue the path of political adventurism. Besides, we don’t have any high hopes or illusions regarding the possibility of Nikos Anastasiades changing course from now onwards.
