Excerpts from an interview given by Andros Kyprianou, General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL, to “Politis” daily newspaper

Sunday, 20th June 2015

 

After the 22^nd Congress do you consider that AKEL is in a position to address the vital issues our country is facing in a better way?

I must say that in recent years we faced an extremely difficult situation as a Party, in the sense that we found ourselves in government in very adverse conditions. The way in which the then opposition handled the Christofias presidency I believe must go down in history as the worst way in exercising political affairs, given that not only did it engage in a levelling, but also a destructive opposition; an opposition that I consider was damaging for the country, both also for the Cyprus problem and economy. We have clarified that specific steps should have been taken and goals on every issue that we would face were set out after the presidential elections.

Your Party’s first challenge after the 2013 presidential elections was the European elections.

Concerning the European elections, we had stated that our objective was for AKEL to maintain a high percentage that would enable it to remain a leading force and allow it to return to the frontline of political life. For us the Congress was an excellent opportunity to inaugurate an all-out attack, with the aim of AKEL winning once again the trust of the majority of the Cypriot people and defend working people’s rights.

Do you consider you have fulfilled this goal?

I want to express my full satisfaction with the results of the Congress and the very open dialogue that was conducted. I have read some comments in the mass media and I’ll just say that everyone is free to say what he/she wants…

Comments on what issue?

On how AKEL is, but also about some derisory comments on my own references about how much a democratic party AKEL is. I would like to challenge them to state whether there is any other Congress of a political party where 120 delegates have taken the floor and stated their views in a free manner, discussing political resolutions, issuing declarations and approving decisions on a whole range of political issues. At the Congress there was a very fruitful and constructive dialogue which many times began from different starting points. However, we managed through a synthesis of views to arrive more or less at unanimous decisions. There was an admirable unity exhibited, despite the fact that various “well-wishers” were saying that many problems would surface at our Congress. We proceeded with great unity and adopted very clear political positions, having reconfirmed the character and identity of our Party.

(…)

On the economy, the government considers that the statistical figures show an improvement in the situation and that we shall soon exit from the Memorandum, also taking into account the praise received from the Europeans. At the same time, it considers that your own proposal that was formulated after the 2013 elections did not offer any solutions to the problems.

The first thing I would like to say is that it would have been strange had the Europeans not praised the government, given that it followed faithfully and blindly not only what they demanded, but in some cases even imposed additional measures. They justifiably praise the government because it is better than them in the implementation of anti-social policies and policies for selling off public wealth. I would also like to say that the figures and indexes are not “prospering”. When you have 29% of the population living below the poverty line, unemployment at 16% with 45,000 of our compatriots, mainly university graduates, migrating abroad because of the economic situation, when pensioner’s incomes are being reduced by 40%, when wages have fallen by 30%, when the people are facing the danger of losing their homes, when public wealth and assets are being sold off at knock-down prices to private interests, what “prosperity” of figures and indexes are we talking about?

But the statistical figures and indexes illustrate an improvement in the economic situation?

It is a fairytale if one believes that when the indexes are prospering people are also prospering. Let me give the example of Ghana which has taken recourse to the IMF to request assistance. At this moment, it is under a Memorandum. Ghana is leading the way, as we are too, in the implementation of the IMF’s demands which are the same as those being imposed in Cyprus. Right now Ghana is the first developing economy in Africa and is among the 20 most developing economies throughout the world. What is the real situation in the country however? Almost 4,000 schools have no buildings and school pupils are taking lessons under trees. In the northern regions there is one doctor for every 161,000 people…

Isn’t it an exaggeration for a comparison to be made with Ghana?

It is the most developing economy in Africa. I say this because it’s important to see in which direction growth is going and whether this growth serves the people as a whole or 4/5 big businessmen. Let me give the example of the shopping hours of big supermarkets in Cyprus where 4/5 big businesses have benefited, while all the other supermarkets, all the SME’s and thousands of working people are saying that the liberalization of shopping hours is catastrophic. The government is ignoring all of these people and serving the interests of 4/5 big businessmen. This isn’t the kind of growth we are envisaging for Cyprus and the Cypriot people. The question of what the crisis leaves behind is important. At some time we will exit from the Memorandum, but we will not exit from the loan agreement and the austerity policies and privatizations the European Union is imposing. Look at the banking union being promoted that will prove to be so devastating for Cyprus.

You are being accused that you are on a common course with the governing DISY party, and indeed the recent appointment of a deputy tax inspector gave the pretext for some to suggest that this common course is also related to issues concerning the mutual covering of cases of interwoven interests.

AKEL sets out its position on various issues with the criterion being how best to serve the interests of the Cypriot people and especially of the working people with regards social, economic and labour issues. Why does AKEL state its position towards the government in a different way on issues related to the economy than on the Cyprus problem? On the economy, we consider that the government and the European Union in general are pursuing anti-social policies that are attacking working people’s rights, gains and interests and serve the interests of a privileged few. We believe that we must stand on the side of the overwhelming majority of the people and defend its interests and that is why we also pursue the specific policies.

With regards the Cyprus problem?

How do we serve the interests of the Cypriot people best on the Cyprus problem? Is it by adopting maximalist positions that will lead to partition? Partition would be a catastrophe and we consider that the Cypriot people’s interests are served better by remaining dedicated to the agreed framework which we have accepted, along with the international community and the Turkish Cypriot community since 1977; by insisting on these principles for the solution of the Cyprus problem and by seeking an agreement that would be based on these principles. There are also the long-standing unanimous decisions approved by the National Council that set out the very framework of the solution.

Is there a basis for forging a cooperation with the government and DISY party on the Cyprus problem?

There is absolutely no such framework whatsoever. It is extraordinary that we are being accused of forging cooperation with the DISY party by those very forces and circles that though they publicly criticize us when critical decisions are taken in Parliament they themselves vote in favour of all the government’s policies directed against the working people, SME’s, farmers, young people and women.

Are you referring to the DIKO party?

I am not only referring to DIKO, but to other parties as well. Permit me to refer to the issues relating to foreclosures, insolvency, privatizations and other issues which certain opposition parties support the government’s positions and at the same time when talking about one appointment mentioned previously declare that there is cooperation between AKEL and DISY. I think that they are now acting irrationally and not with logic.

Do you consider that the opposition’s unity is split as a result of the decision taken by EDEK to renounce bi-zonal, bi-communal federation as the basis of the solution of the Cyprus problem?

We do not act according to a logic based on fronts. We state our position based on how better the Cypriot people’s interests can be served. If we judge that on one issue it is imperative that we cooperate with DIKO, EDEK or any others we will do so. If we judge that we must adopt another position, different form theirs, we will do so. We are not a dogmatic party, but we determine our position according to how best we can serve the people’s interests. This is the principle that guides us.

Do you believe that the prospects for a solution of the Cyprus problem are hopeful, as developments are also evolving due to the assumption by Mr. Akinci of the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community?

A good atmosphere has been created, but illusions shouldn’t be cultivated. The path ahead of us will be long and difficult.

The truth is we do have a tendency towards exaggeration…

There is exaggeration and that isn’t a good counsellor. We must be briefed by the President of the Republic about what is going on with regards the Christofias-Talat convergences. I would like to express our satisfaction because all that has been discussed within the context of exploring the positions of the two sides is on the one hand the positions that have been submitted by Mr. Anastasiades, but there are also the Christofias-Talat convergences. We consider these convergences as very important because we can subsequently cover a great distance. We have to cover some distance and we must be very careful and not cultivate excessive expectations and spread illusions amongst the people. At the same time, we must be determined. We must work towards the direction of utilizing all the possibilities and if possible arrive at an agreement. This will not depend solely on us, but it will also depend on the Turkish Cypriot side and Turkey, as well as on the way the United Nations will operate and act.

You will have noted that an atmosphere of discord and conflict is being created and that certain forces and circles on the domestic front are already propagating that “DISY-AKEL” want to sell out the homeland etc.

AKEL is a patriotic party and what it wants to achieve is to serve the interests of Cyprus and the Cypriot people. There is not any “DISY-AKEL” alliance, nor will there ever be one and I want to be very clear on this issue. There is a huge gap separating us with DISY party in our positions. If DISY supported correct positions on the Cyprus problem – something it did not do during the Christofias governance – we would have welcomed this stance. We would also have welcomed the stance of any other political party that would support correct positions in the given conditions with regards the Cyprus problem. It is regrettable that certain forces are attempting to ignite the atmosphere and worst of all, they do not comprehend what the consequences will be on the developments on the Cyprus problem if this effort to solve the problem fails. They think that we can assert something better for Cyprus. Developments will be in the opposite direction and this will bring us closer to the final partition of Cyprus.

Concerning the economy, do you believe that the situation as it has evolved in Greece deprives AKEL of arguments in relation to all the talk about adopting a hard bargaining attitude etc.?

Not at all. It reaffirms the correctness of our approaches. The issues are political and have to do with a different philosophy. The European Union because it doesn’t want the policies it is promoting over several decades to be challenged, will not accept to give anything to Greece that will ruin the picture it has formed. We anticipated things would develop as they have done and that they would attempt to strangle Greece for purely ideological and political reasons.

And what is the alternative?

We’ll see. If the EU believes that it will not suffer damage from a potential Greek exit from the Eurozone, then it is fooling itself miserably. We shall see what the consequences will be, if of course such a development were to occur. All these developments are taking place as a result of the dogmatic insistence on implementing their own philosophy.

Do you consider that the conditions under which AKEL took a position in favour of Cyprus’ accession to the EU and the Eurozone, with specific objections, have changed today? If the same question was put today would you have taken another position?

We haven’t dealt with this issue. Let me recall that we backed the accession to the EU principally for reasons related to the Cyprus problem. Unfortunately, so far the EU hasn’t helped as much as we wanted in the efforts to solve the Cyprus problem. We had clarified at the same time that we would struggle within the EU to defend the rights of the working people, which on the pretext of the economic crisis are being attacked and curbed. It is obvious that developments didn’t go in the direction we would have liked.

And the Eurozone?

I believe that that it has been proved how right we were. A large number of economists both in Cyprus and throughout the world are admitting that our hasty accession to the Eurozone has caused huge problems to the Cyprus economy and did not help us address the difficulties as they emerged, primarily due to the problems in the banking sector. However, I reiterate that we haven’t dealt with the issue of remaining in the EU. It is a very complex issue and demands a great deal of consideration and study.

Do you believe that that study on the economy which AKEL had carried out after the presidential elections needs to be revised?

Of course it needs to be revised because the given conditions on the basis of which that study had been prepared have changed radically. Since then 90% of the Memorandum has been applied. That study was, yes, not a recipe-solution to the problems. It was a view that should be completed, discussed, elaborated and put numerous conditions for its implementation. We therefore cannot automatically say that that study applies in the same way today. This is the reason why we are working with numerous academics who are trying to help us.

How do you keep a balance and maintain good relations with both the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) and SYRIZA, despite the fact that they have totally different positions on these issues?

Because we have our own approach and views. We are not a party that wants to be identified dogmatically with one or the other. With the KKE we are connected by fraternal bonds and a huge simultaneous course of struggle over many years. We admire the struggles of the KKE, but not all of our approaches/views are identical on all issues, as we certainly do not identify with the positions of SYRIZA. AKEL has its own political approach on all the issues without exception. I don’t understand why we must identify with either KKE, or with SYRIZA.