AKEL ON THE 87th ANNIVERSARY OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF CYPRUS (KKK) -AKEL
Speech by Andros Kyprianou, Secretary General of the C.C of AKEL at the event organised by AKEL Larnaca
District Organisation to honour the 87th anniversary of the Communist Party of Cyprus KKK and AKEL
29th October 29 2013, Skarinou village, Larnaca
Here in this small humble house a Party was born in 1941 that took the baton from the Communist Party of Cyprus KKK; a Party that would continue the course of the working people towards the future. This Party is AKEL, a Party that wasn’t founded and built by the privileged few and those who have never laboured and suffered, but by founded and built by and through the sweat and rough-skinned hands of workers; a Party that sprang not from the salons of the elite, but from the poor neighbourhoods and fields; a Party that transmitted its messages not by rhetoric and cheap political promises, but with the clear and vibrant words reflecting people’s needs, the words of bloody strikes and demonstrations; a Party, to recall the words of the late comrade Ezekias Papaioannou*, “built with immense work, tears and blood”; a Party which is, and will remain, the Party of the determined Cypriot people.
Exile, imprisonment, persecution, torture, murders, twice in illegality. Foreign and local forces had the same goal: to do away once and for all with the “communists”. The Communist Party of Cyprus was banned after the bloody suppression of the people’s uprising of the 1931 October events – as the Historical Encyclopaedia of Cyprus admits – because “the British Governor of Cyprus was particularly concerned about the activity of the communists. Their activity was the only dissenting voice to the administration it had managed to impose.” The British colonialists banished the leaders the KKK, Vatis and Skeleas, to exile abroad. They imprisoned most of its militants without trial, while others were exiled. The Party however continued its struggle even in illegality, fighting heroically and selflessly against colonialism, for working people’s rights. The Party itself was restructured and reorganized, as well as the trade union movement, subsequently guiding the first big strike mobilisations.
With the outbreak of the Second World War, the British colonialists, in confrontation with Nazi Germany, eased the repressive measures they had imposed on their colonies, in order to protect themselves. This also was the case in Cyprus. This situation was utilized in the best way by the Party. The advance of the class struggle and the needs of the anti-colonial struggle made the work of embracing a growing mass of people imperative. Since the KKK could not be legalized, the decision was taken to establish a new party, namely the Progressive Party of Working People; a Party with a democratic, anti-Hitler and anti-fascist character. Each one of these definitions of our character, as the founding declaration of AKEL sets out, was honoured with the blood of hundreds of members and cadres of AKEL, whether in the struggles for the Cypriot people’s political, civil rights and liberties, in the trenches of the war against Hitler fascism and years later, in the struggle so that the fascism of Grivas and EOKA B’* will not pass.
AKEL all through the years of its existence has led the Cypriot people in its major, and often bloody, struggles. It fought together with the people for the self-evident right of the Cypriot people to live in a free country. It stood at the head and forefront of the struggles of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots for a living wage. Together with the people it won the battle for an eight-hour working day, for the right to social insurance, the Automatic Cost of Living Allowance and other important worker’s gains through bloody class struggles. It developed its activity from the bastion of the educational, cultural and athletic clubs so that culture could become the property of the people. It put its mark, through its presence and struggles, on the main and most important social and political people’s gains.
This of course is not a coincidence. To lead the popular and class struggle is not something that is given to you; you have to earn and win it. AKEL earned it because it was, and remains, a class-based Party expressing the working people and defending with consistency and militancy their interests and rights. AKEL gained this privilege because it was, and remains, the voice of a correct policy in the various stages the Cyprus problem has gone through, from the era of colonialism to the present. We had prioritized mass political struggle as the way to achieve our liberation from the British yoke. History has vindicated us. We stood as a bastion and combated nationalism and chauvinism. We built on the ruins of the 1974 coup d’état, invasion and occupation the rapprochement, friendship and mutual respect between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. We united the voices of all Cypriots in the anti- imperialist struggle for the liberation and reunification of Cyprus. We fought against fascism, whatever mask it put on at various times. We united our voices with those of the peoples of the whole world in the front of internationalism, struggle and solidarity. All of this at the same time when we faced the hideousness of anticommunism against us, the labelling and insults, the obsessions and the wave of murders committed against us.
Is all this some beautiful political history which certain forces have today hasted to pronounce its end? During the five years of the Demetris Christofias administration, especially in the period following the tragic accident at Mari, everything pointed at this was what it all about: a political and ideological attack against Demetris Christofias and AKEL. Is this assessment perhaps an exaggeration? Is it perhaps the product of some conspiracy theory AKEL has manufactured to enforce its own defence, as some forces are accusing it of? With the end of five year term of the Christofias administration, we do not hesitate to say that there errors and omissions had been committed, as we have at the same time never ceased stressing that a significant and multifaceted work was produced.
However, those accusing Christofias and AKEL did not limit themselves, unfortunately for Cyprus and its people, to exert well-intentioned constructive and political criticism. Even to this day they talk about “unacceptable concessions”, “excessive social spending”, “lack of courage” and “ideological obsessions” in an attempt to denigrate and discredit the essence of the political positions expressed by the Left in the five years that have passed.
Were the proposals submitted by Demetris Christofias with regards the solution of the Cyprus problem indeed “unacceptable concessions”? Perhaps this is so in the minds of those who prefer “better to have only half of Cyprus, but at least a homogenous Greek state”. However, in our view the proposals submitted were unifying and workable. They averted once and for all the danger of ethnic confrontation and united Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriot on a political basis. This was the substance of the content of the proposals tabled for a rotating Presidency and the crossover vote. This is the reason why they were rejected precisely by the very same political spectrums and forces, both within the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot community.
Did the country’s economy suffer an enormous blow because “cheques” for social policy were given? Obviously, the opposition was at that time referring to the state policy on social benefits, pensions and welfare benefits whose amount the Christofias government had increased. This reference on its own reveals the ideological approach of the Right towards social policy. Consequently, they blamed the government policy on pensions and public assistances. Then, Mr. Neophytou* and others were saying all this, as they had assumed the role of political representative of the former Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus, but also of a number of bankers. At that time they did not apportion any responsibility whatsoever on anyone other than D. Christofias and AKEL. Today, when they are now forced de facto to tell the truth, they admit that the problems of the Cyprus economy were caused mainly by the lack of supervision exerted by the Governor of the Central Bank and the criminal decisions taken by the bankers.
Was it the “lack of courage” of the Christofias government to take measures which pushed the Cyprus economy to the Troika? A series of measures were taken in relation to the financial sector. However, as we had pointed out many times, even if the budget deficit was minimal we would still not have avoided the recourse to the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) if we were not able to cover the recapitalization of the banks amounting to billions of Euros.
Was the fact that Cyprus did not take recourse earlier to the Troika perhaps an “ideological obsession”? In retrospect as can be seen, one thing is sure, namely that the Troika showed unwavering ideological confidence in Mr. Anastasiades’ obsessions. This is why the President of the Eurogroup long before the presidential elections made the statement full of meaning that the Memorandum would be left to be agreed by the new Government after the elections. This is the reason why the whole of the European People’s Party supported the election of Mr. Anastasiades by organizing a session-fiesta in Cyprus and issuing nice-sounding statements. It did so because they knew that Mr. Anastasiades was ready to accept their demands.
In addition, the government camp should stop their insistence on arguing that President Anastasiades found himself on that evening facing “a gun to his head” and that he had been “caught by surprise”. His statement that he knew about the haircut on the bank deposits days before that decision is recorded. It was Mr. Anastasiades himself who made the pledge and again promised that he would not accept the haircut on deposits.
Mr Anastasiades should stop insisting that he was “caught unaware” by the Troika’s demand for a haircut on deposits. Just yesterday the current Governor of the Cyprus Central Bank Mr. Demetriades revealed what everyone already knew. He said that the first time the possibility of a haircut on deposits was officially put was in the beginning of March after the election to the Presidency of Mr. Anastasiades. He stated that after the 4th March Eurogroup meeting there was a meeting of the Council of the European Central Bank and a briefing took place about the fact that this issue was indeed raised. He said that he himself received a call from Mr. Anastasiades and that he had informed him about it.
So, at least they shouldn’t accuse D. Christofias of a “lack of courage” who had never discussed such unacceptable demands, at the same time when Mr. Anastasiades himself did not have the courage to defend his own commitments.
No matter how much mistrust they may cast, the truth cannot be hidden. Demetris Christofias struggled to tackle the consequences of the international capitalist crisis, drawing a red line with regards the protection of workers, young people, pensioners on low incomes, that is to say those in need. He did so by many ways: by successive increases in the minimum wage, through social pensions, enhancing the welfare state by strengthening the policy on refugees, housing and social policy in general. This is the policy which the government of Nicos Anastasiades dismantled.
The first budget tabled by the Government Anastasiades is characteristic. Firstly, we note the fact that 626 million Euros have been cut, although the Memorandum obligation provided refers to cuts of around 270 million Euros. We have asked several times until today why an additional 356 million Euros of cuts have been implemented. However, we did not get an answer. Furthermore, cuts of 96 million Euros have been made in development projects, as well as cuts of 127 million Euros in benefits for pensioners, in health and social welfare. Furthermore, cuts of 20 million Euros in the benefits for education have been made .
It is clearly obvious that the policy of the Anastasiades government is affecting the overwhelming majority of the people whilst protecting the privileged few. I am not only referring to cuts in social welfare, health and education. Nor am I referring to the crises in honesty of the DISY MP’s who openly support for example that we must pay for education, but to the policies such as the Ministerial Council decision to extend the working hours of shops. These policies increase the profitability only of two/ three magnates, lead to the closure of hundreds of SMEs, paving the way to the abolition of labour gains and cause social problems to thousands of families of working women. In the charts recently published by the International Monetary Fund, which illustrate very symbolically where the Memorandum policies are leading to, productivity is increasing dramatically whereas wages are plunging downwards constantly. The revealing statement published by the Inland Revenue Department has disclosed that the vast majority of those who paid the property tax are smallholders. The policy of privatizations will sell-off at half-price to the monopolies profitable Semi-government organizations, regardless of the consequences to Cyprus’ national security and to the timeless support these offer to the state, leading to unemployment rising further.
Regarding the Cyprus problem we had from the very outset stressed that we shall support every effort by President Anastasiades so long as it advances within the correct framework. However, we will not support any handlings of the Cyprus problem that are made without the political forces being informed, or any dangerous fluctuations and inconsistencies.
Unfortunately, so far we have noted such phenomena. The proposal on Famagusta was discussed with EU and Turkish officials without the political leadership of the country knowing anything about it at all, as it didn’t also know about Mr Anastasiades’ proposal for reciprocity with regards to the contact of the negotiators with the respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Greece and Turkey.
Today Mr. Eroglu* the Turkish Cypriot leader, despite the fact that he has given up the procedure under Demetris Christofias, presents himself as ready to continue the negotiation from where it had left off. However, Mr Anastasiades, even though the myth of the supposedly unacceptable concessions of Christofias has collapsed as a result of the Downer document being made public, avoids clarifying his position. At the same time, on the initiative of the Greek Cypriot side the Christofias – Talat joint communiques were removed from the last UN Security Council resolution. For the first time the Turkish Cypriot side had agreed to a single sovereignty, a single international personality and a single citizenship. As a result the Turkish side is intensifying its demands with regards the joint communiqué. This is not only making the beginning of talks difficult, but it also harbours dangers for the further course of developments.
Our Party has for some time now stressed and reiterates the need to safeguard the basis of the talks as defined by International and European law, the UN resolutions, the High-Level Agreements and the joint Christofias – Talat communiqués; to safeguard the important convergences that were reached between the two previous leaders. If we proceed on this path, then no one will have grounds to impose their own framework on us. Moreover, if our policy is balanced and dialectical, then everyone will understand that they cannot impose anything on us. This is the safest and most secure way to work for a solution as soon as possible; for a just, fair, functional and lasting solution. That is why it is necessary to convene the National Council* in order to analyse the overall framework within which we shall work to solve the Cyprus problem.
We should also analyse within the same context the issue of energy as well. The game of rivalries in our region is great and dangerous. Let’s not be complacent by having the naive estimation that American interests are limited to the axis of Greece, Israel, and Cyprus. The US has never stopped defending Turkey and its interests in the region, because it sees is a valuable ally of its policy.
Today, one can see that every gain won by working people, every opportunity for our country to move forward is being challenged. Our Party has of course taken the responsibility and set as it’s duty the defence of working people’s gains and struggle for the future of our country and people.
I feel an obligation, on the occasion that with us today are comrades who have completed 50 years of life and struggle in the Party, as well with new comrades who have now joined the Party, to say a few words about AKEL. Our young comrades will continue today the path charted by the comrades of the past generations. As is the case for almost 90 years, the hands holding our banners change, but the banners themselves have never changed. This fact has forced us several times to remind friends and foes alike that this Party is not coincidental, it is not here today – gone tomorrow. As long as the causes that gave birth to it exist, it will continue to exist and struggle.
Let’s be honest. We have come under so much fierce political attacks in recent years that one could say that maybe a section of the people supporting AKEL have seen their trust and confidence shaken. However, our Party has never overcome difficulties and tests by doubting its own self. We know who we are. We are the ones who talk first and foremost to the minds of the people. This is our strength. We convey to the people universal and invincible ideals. We convert the vanguard theory into vanguard action. We stand up and resist the onslaught of anti-peoples policies, neo-fascism and the nightmarish scenario of partition. We address the people based on political principles, based on its needs and guided by its own future.
This is how we function inside the Party too. We discuss freely but always function and work as one, united. The fact is that the principles of how AKEL functions have on many occasions come under attack, once even in an organized form. We have said many times and will say it again: the right of debate and criticism within the bodies of the party is given. Equally given and self-evident is the duty of every Party member to protect this freedom from the moment this concludes with decisions. The Party member serves these decisions, thus enhancing the unity of the Party. This is precisely what the critics of our Party pretend they do not understand; that our Party does not operate on decisions taken by anyone individual or by decrees; that within the bodies of the Party each and every one of us with personal and collective responsibility discusses and takes decisions which are then implemented in practice.
It has been said and written many times until now that our Party is not the same as it was. I will just say this: To be a member of a Party of this type you need conviction, ethos and competency. Anyone who doesn’t have these characteristics will find it difficult to keep on struggling within the ranks of the Party, as well as the Party will find it difficult to keep him/her in its ranks. We are neither a society of angels, nor a closed society. We consciously became a member of a Party that we know has no room for vested interests, neither for in-fighting, nor personal accommodation/promotion and interests; neither personal carriers nor projecting one’s self. A Party is not guided by society’s illnesses and negative phenomena, but rather guides society itself. This is the greatest honour for every one that holds the membership card of AKEL: the fact that he/she is not struggling for himself/herself, not for personal gain and interest, but for the future of society. It is worth making all sacrifices for this struggle!
Therefore, in resisting and defying all those who think that visions and ideas can be bought and sold off, we shall continue to struggle – until the final victory!
Notes:
*Ezekias Papaioannou: the late historic leader of the C.C. of AKEL and prominent figure of the international communist movement.
*EOKA B: an underground illegal ultra-right, nationalist and anti-communist armed organisation formed in 1971 by Cypriot-origin General Georgios Grivas, aiming at “Enosis” – union with Greece. It was guided and funded by the military junta of Greece and reactionary external forces during the period 1971-1974, preparing the ground for and participating in the fascist coup d’état against the democratically elected President Makarios, opening the back door for the Turkish invasion and occupation of Cyprus in the summer of 1974, hence completing the twin NATO crime and conspiracy against the Republic of Cyprus.
*Averof Neofytou: the current President of the ruling Democratic Rally party, member of EPP.
*Dervis Eroglou: leader of the Turkish Cypriot community and former leader of the right-wing nationalist UBP party.
*National Council: an advisory body to the President of the Republic composed of all the parliamentary parties and former Presidents.
*
