HYPOCRISY, populism and irresponsible sloganeering have always been the main features of Cyprus political life. How could the gang of DISY rebels, who are standing against their party in the Euro elections, be any different? In fact, the gang is proving to be an upholder of these qualities and a champion of political incoherence. As someone who has encountered the protagonists of this story, I feel obliged to express an opinion about their antics I will do my best to ensure this is not influenced by the fact I know them personally.
The main argument of the rebels is that DISY, with the stance it took in favour of the Annan plan, deviated from its long-established policy and declared positions on the national problem. This claim is ludicrous, idiotic, audacious, malevolent and without any historic truth. For all those who are acquainted with the history of DISY, this claim reveals the true character of the members of the Yiannakis Matsis gang. Even the stones of Cyprus know that, if there is one thing on which DISY has been consistent throughout its existence, it is on its policy on the Cyprus problem. There was one small deviation in the case of the Ghali ‘set of ideas’ which were submitted in 1992.
The truth is that DISY was created in order to secure a negotiated settlement of the Cyprus issue, of the type outlined by the Annan plan. It was set up to pursue the bi-zonal, bi-communal federation, an objective set out in a speech in 1975 by its founder and first leader Glafcos Clerides. It would be no exaggeration to say that DISY was established with the sole purpose of working for a day like April 24 to arrive; the day that would bring the longed for solution, re-unification of the island and withdrawal of the occupation troops. This was its primary objective throughout its 28-year history.
Its leader, Nicos Anastassiades, whom the rebels have been trying to topple because of his support of the Annan plan, could be criticised for many things, but he deserves unreserved praise for the stand he took in the referendum. He remained true to his party’s long-established policy on the Cyprus issue, ignoring the certain political cost that he would be personally burdened with. For that he should be congratulated.
Rebel deputy Prodromos Prodromou, who went against his party’s decision and was subsequently expelled, is justified in talking nonsense as he only joined DISY, through the back door, in 1996 in order to win a seat in the House. A few days before he had been selected to stand as an ‘independent’ DISY candidate by the then party leader Matsis, he was still writing critical articles in Simerini about the Cyprus policy of DISY and Clerides. That he seized the opportunity to stand as a candidate of DISY, instead of joining Koutsou’s Nei Orizontes, the ideology of which was much closer to his own, was proof of his political opportunism.
Matsis’ behaviour has been so bizarre it defies description. He returned to politics, he told us, not because he was nursing political ambition but to save us from the Annan plan. He is uttering this nonsense, one month after the referendum. Yet the Annan plan has been in the public domain since November 2002. For 17 whole months the plan had been with us and anyone who was anyone in politics appeared on television to give their views about it. The only Cypriot who did not deem it necessary to open his mouth and talk about the plan was Matsis. For 17 months he did not consider the plan dangerous. Only after April 24, when it was dead and buried, did Matsis decide that he should save us from it.
But Matsis, who was an active member of DISY from 1977 until 1997 – first deputy leader and then leader for four years – should answer one thing. During those 20 years, at least four settlement plans had been presented to the two sides and all four were very similar to the Annan plan. DISY supported the acceptance of all four of them and so did Matsis. What is happening now? How come all of a sudden Matsis is opposed to a federal settlement? Is it because now circumstances are favourable for him to settle old scores with Clerides and Anastassiades that he has developed an aversion to UN peace plans?
I urge DISY supporters to take the above into consideration when they are at the ballot box on June 13. Giving a vote to the outrageous political opportunism of the contemptible Matsis gang would be a betrayal of DISY and everything it has stood for in its 28-year history.
