Excerpts from an interview with Aristos Damianou, member of the Political Bureau of the C.C. of AKEL
“FILELEFTHEROS” newspaper, 28th June 2015
If someone were to read into AKEL’s decisions after the last Party Congress one could conclude that the only positive development we can observe in the country at this moment is with regards the Cyprus problem, whereas everything else is in a bad state. Isn’t that how things stand?
The attempt we made in our programmatic Theses presented towards the Congress was to outline the real situation and reality of Cypriot society, which of course is not good. We all acknowledge, in one way or another that there is an ongoing economic hardship. I do not deny at all that the government has inherited a difficult situation, but at the same time an objective observer must note that life for the low income strata continues to be difficult and for many people conditions have become even more difficult. As a result, we do indeed consider that on issues related to socio-economic policy developments are not good and not as expected, a great deal more can be done to alleviate the problems.
With regards the Cyprus problem, we had arrived at the conclusion and had no problem in conflicting with those circles and forces on the domestic front who are downgrading the hopeful message created by the assumption by Mr. Akinci of the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community. We consider that de facto a dynamic has been created which we must grasp. It is important to find a way to breach the deadlock which is prolonged. At the same time, we unequivocally declare with our decisions that we support the prospect of the solution of the Cyprus problem – which is the cornerstone of AKEL’s activity – and will support it and the procedure of the talks by every action that can contribute to this effort. Of course decisions on the Cyprus problem rest with the given President of the Republic who on the one hand bears the responsibility, but we consider that right now the collective handling of the Cyprus problem is imperative.
At the same time however a form of blackmail is underway calling on him to move within the framework of the Christofias-Talat agreements…
This widely discussed issue has been solved by life itself. If you ask the Negotiating Team of the President of the Republic it will tell you that de facto the Christofias-Talat convergences/agreements represent a useful tool in the negotiation, if not also constituting the basis of all that is under discussion today. Consequently, this is not a question of blackmail. Rather, when we were in government we came under corresponding blackmailing, but I don’t want to stand on this point. It is a question of utilizing those issues that had been effectively addressed within the framework of the talks – that is to say that thee of the six chapters had proceeded to the point that they are considered as closed. We therefore consider that the President can capitalize on these issues. He maintains the right, and we acknowledge it, to differentiate, enrich and improve the convergences. May he manage to improve these agreements and we shall greet it. However, the experience in the previous months and up to one and two years shows that where attempts have been made to improve things that had previously been agreed, such as for example the two Christofias-Talat joint communiqués that safeguarded for the very first time the single sovereignty, we had in the course of developments with Eroglu a communiqué that in our opinion was inferior – at least on the issues relating to sovereignty. As a consequence, there is no blackmail being exerted on the President and of course we retain our right where and whenever we consider that he is moving on a wrong path to judge him strictly too.
Do you believe that more emphasis has been given to Confidence Building Measures (CBM) that to the essence of the Cyprus problem?
This is a long-standing concern of our community because we are the ones who must stress at every opportunity our will for a solution of the Cyprus problem. The other side, or better still Turkey, is not in such a hurry for a solution of the Cyprus problem, regardless if the circumstances are such that under certain preconditions we could be led to a solution of the Cyprus problem which of course must be achieved through talks.
Our own position is consistent. CBM’s should assist the efforts for a solution of the Cyprus problem, break the ice and create cracks in the wall of partition. This is also the reason why the discussion is ongoing today about opening cross points and other checkpoints. However, we must be very careful so that we don’t devote all our energies to a discussion focused exclusively on CBM’s and lose sight of the essence, namely the solution of the Cyprus problem. In every case we consider that measures that enhance the efforts to bridge the gap are positive, must be supported and we shouldn’t be afraid of the perspective through the coming together of people in order to break the ice to address a part of what we perceive as the internal aspect of the Cyprus problem, that is to say concerning the relations between the two communities.
I should recall that we have entered the third generation of refugees and most of our compatriots do not even have the experience of living together with Turkish Cypriots and the same goes for Turkish Cypriots with Greek Cypriots. Therefore, we must utilize the dynamic without dealing exclusively with CBM”s.
The support that AKEL provides to the President of the Republic is interpreted by certain circles and forces well-intentionally, and others in bad faith as identification or a common course with the DISY party. This is something that seems to annoy AKEL…
The Cypriot people elected Nicos Anastasiades to the Presidency of the Republic. The President of the Republic is the given negotiator, something which is the case since 1977 onwards. Consequently, AKEL supports the procedure of the talks because we consider that only through this procedure under the auspices of the United Nations can we arrive at a solution of the Cyprus problem. I said previously that we have the right to judge the President of the Republic and of course AKEL does not give a blank cheque, neither today, nor did it in the past to any President with regards the handling of the Cyprus problem. We believe that there must greater collectivity, especially within the framework of the National Council[1].
At the same time we must record a reality. That is to say, an enormous historical and political gulf – and I regret to say I can’t find a milder word – that divides us with the DISY party on many issues. At the same time as political forces, at least at the level of our intentions, there is a will to solve the Cyprus problem for the good of the country. Of course there are different approaches. For example, we will never accept the logic of a decentralized or loose federation. We strongly believe that a strong central government safeguards the unity of the state. We are not concerned about the support to the procedure of the solution, which is led by Mr. Anastasiades. What we want to clarify is that at this precise moment we are ready to put to one side all that over the recent years has troubled us. I must say that there is not a hint of revanchism in our positions – because we could have behaved in a corresponding way as an opposition party like the treatment we faced by the DISY party and other political forces when we were in government. However, I repeat what comes first and is the major priority for AKEL is the good of the country.
On issues concerning internal governance AKEL is making efforts to cooperate with the other parties apart from DISY party which is the governing ruling party. Are these efforts delivering results?
We are trying to find convergences, particularly inside the House of Representatives, the result of which will lead to the alleviation of the problems people are facing due to the crisis, a crisis that is systemic and which as far as Cyprus is concerned is primarily a banking crisis and in fact for convergences to be agreed the magic number of 29 Members of Parliament is required for a majority. I must say that on numerous issues there is a different approach from the governing party and objectively we are trying to achieve convergences with the opposition parties. This is not an easy effort. Sometimes we don’t arrive at the necessary convergences with the centre Democratic Party, but not with the Socialist party EDEK either. However, on some issues it is true that there is a common ground upon which we build on regarding secondary issues.
I stress that this discussion has no relation whatsoever with the any perspective on the presidential elections. Today is 2015. We are a long way off from any elections, subsequently whatever associations, political or otherwise, journalistic, must not and cannot be made because there is no such thing in the back of our minds at least. What we are interested in is through the necessary convergences, and many times we make some concession so that we can meet in the middle, either with DIKO or with EDEK, or even with parties with a single MP, to proceed to what we consider the combating of the real problems through legislation we believe must be achieved.
You claim that all these attempts to forge cooperation (Note: with opposition parties at a parliamentary level) have nothing to do with the presidential elections. Is this the reason why the reference to the concrete issue in the Congress decision was somewhat vague and with just the reference that the goal of AKEL is the change without going into any details?
Let me remind you next year we will have parliamentary elections and subsequently municipal elections. I should point out that we are discussing this issue at a time when developments on the Cyprus problems are ongoing and reaching a climax. Our goal and objective is to solve the Cyprus problem. It would be irresponsible to say the least to engage in a premature discussion about the presidential elections and we did not do so, as you correctly point out, within the framework of the Party Congress. What we did do at the Congress, and this has been registered as AKEL’s position, is that cooperation within the context of our state system is necessary. No party or candidate can gather more than 50% to be elected as President of the Republic. However this cooperation must be forged based on principles. These principles must not be declaratory, but with regards the Cyprus problem the experience of our own administration has demonstrated in a tragic way that the agreement concerning the outline of the solution is not enough. Therefore there must be sufficient substance and content in the political positions, especially in relation to the Cyprus problem, for any cooperation to proceed because we have suffered and learnt from the past from corresponding behavior.
You have referred to the parliamentary and municipal elections due to take place next year. Normally the political parties use these elections to make their preparations, internal plans and calculations and create the basis of the cooperation for the future.
Many put forth the position that parliamentary elections set the stage for the presidential elections. I should say something we must all remember, that is that politics is not about adding numbers. Quite a few times we have seen people who considered that they had secured the magic number for a majority but eventually lost out. AKEL remains a powerful force that can determine and co-determine the future of this country and all subsequent decisions on developments will be taken in due time.
[1] Advisory body to the given President of the Republic on the Cyprus problem composed of all the parliamentary political parties and former Presidents of the Republic.
