ASTRA – Mr. Georgiou please explain AKEL’s abstention.

Statements by AKEL MEP and member of the Central Committee of AKEL regarding AKEL’s abstention on the European Parliament’s Resolution on Ukraine

Astra radio “Morning Edition” program, 2 March 2022

 

GG: It was a very crucial moment, a historic moment let me say. Everyone had to weigh up his or her conscience. I personally had to confront my conscience and I feel very much at ease with my own conscience in a climate of course characterised by frenzy and the concealment of the truth.

I think the EU has missed a great opportunity to break away from NATO and project its geo-political stigma. To go where it claims it wants and seeks to go, namely to a strategic autonomy. Unfortunately, yesterday the EU turned out to be a political dwarf, a giant with clay legs – in effect the EU is NATO’s tail.

I listened to Mr. Baiden’s speech yesterday and he said this inimitable thing – that NATO was created to go after dictators. Mercy! But don’t they rape the truth every day? There is not a single dictatorship in the world, in Latin America and elsewhere that NATO has not supported.

We as AKEL abstained from voting in favor of the resolution. We condemned in principle and unequivocally the Russian invasion as a violation of international law, the recognition of the independence of the two regions as a violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. We called for an immediate end to hostilities and violence, of Russians or Ukrainians.

However, the resolution was problematic. It was biased. It essentially advocated an escalation of the conflict. It promoted the further militarisation of the European Union. It talked about increasing defence expenditures, the utilisation of the European Defence Fund. It promotes the strengthening of the European Pillar within NATO, as well as the deployment of NATO Rapid Reaction Forces in the east.

But that precisely IS the problem. And the problem was created specifically because no attempt was made to limit NATO’s enlargement to the east and in doing so violating the OSCE Treaties that provide for the safeguarding of the security and stability of all states.

Is the question today how to pour more fuel on to the fire or instead how to make room for diplomacy and dialogue? For these reasons, we, as AKEL, abstained given that the resolution was problematic and since it told just half-truths, there was no way whatsoever we could have voted in favour. At least I, as an MEP, on behalf of AKEL.

Yesterday we highlighted with our stance the need for the truth, for peace and the prosperity of peoples to prevail, regardless of any pretexts anyone uses. The military conflict in Ukraine is the result of the intensification of the antagonisms between two warring camps with the focus on and the objective of redistributing spheres of influence, energy sources and pipeline routes.

On the one hand, we have the USA, the European Union and NATO that support and have supported the reactionary Kiev government, paramilitary and fascist organisations. On the other hand, there is capitalist Russia which has erroneously proceeded to annex Crimea and also wrongly recognise the independence of the so-called “People’s Republics”.

Right now, a great deal of emphasis should have been placed not on armaments and “defence expenditure”, on sending arms to Ukraine, and by doing so pouring fuel to the fire. The EU should have acted to become a pillar and axis through which negotiations would be resumed and proceed to a dialogue that would lead to peace in the region because the worst is ahead of us all… These are the forerunners of great evils that will emerge in the period ahead and already the Ukrainian people and the Russian people, but also the peoples of Europe, will pay a huge cost.

Cyprus, through the sanctions that the EU is imposing recklessly, will pay a huge cost – both in terms of energy and tourism, but also in the services sector.

Speaking in the plenary in Strasbourg last week, I pointed out that Mr. Shultz and Mr. Macron both said that “if Russia is not safe, Europe will not be safe”.

But let’s also talk about NATO. We have seen NATO’s attitude and policy with regards to Cyprus for 48 years, as we have also seen how NATO reacted to Turkey’s provocative actions in the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Republic of Cyprus, the imposition of fait accompli in the enclosed city of Varosha, as well as with regards Mr. Erdogan’s behaviour.

Do you know what Mr. Erdogan did yesterday when the “Pandora’s Box” was opened concerning Ukraine, which they are now pushing to join the EU without any criteria? Mr. Erdogan said: “You should make Turkey a member too”. When the debate on the EU-Turkey Report began, what kind of climate did we encounter? A friendly stand towards Turkey and the covering up of Mr. Erdogan’s illegal actions.

So, we can cite many, many examples. It is the Ukrainian people’s right to choose whatever course they themselves want. Of course it is their right. But why doesn’t Cuba have this same right too, which for 60 years they have been suffocating by imposing this immoral blockade?

Pontius Pilates. They are vigorously “washing their hands” of their responsibilities.