AMERICAN comedian Bill Cosby once said, “I don’t know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody”. This view perfectly describes President Christofias’ first two years in office, which he completes next weekend. Two years in which he has tried to please supporters and opponents of a settlement, workers and employers, nationalists and appeasers, our western allies and his communist friends.
Attempting to please everybody was the primary objective of Christofias’ first two years in office and it backfired. The easy populism he embraced, as party leader and House president, when he had no real, decision-making responsibilities, could not serve him once he came into office. He no longer had the luxury of telling people what they wanted to hear or sitting on the fence accusing others of making the wrong choices as he had done so successfully all his career. This easy role was not an option once he became president, but he refused to give it up, believing, against all logic, that he could somehow keep everyone happy.
It is blatantly obvious that he has failed to achieve this unrealistic objective, but not for want of trying. His desire to be all things to all people has exposed him as a weak and indecisive leader, without a clear vision about what he wants, vacillating between contradictory positions, while constantly obsessing about his public standing and complaining about the criticism he faces. But in these testing times for the economy and the national problem we have a president who is afraid to take the necessary tough decisions because they may be unpopular or provoke a negative reaction by his alliance partners.
As a result, nobody really knows whether he is committed to finding a settlement or not. One day he is lambasting Turkish intransigence and the next he is reporting small signs of progress; he wants the talks to be within the UN framework but criticizes the Secretary-General’s special representative and refuses to accept UN mediation; he complains that talks are moving slowly, but repeatedly rejected Talat’s proposals for more intensified talks (he only agreed after receiving assurances that there would only be six meetings); he insists the key to a solution is in Ankara but declines invitations for a four-party meeting with the Greek and Turkish PMs on the absurd grounds that Talat’s status would be upgraded.
Then there is his insistence on playing down the prospects of the talks in order to minimise domestic criticism by the opponents of a settlement, who until recently were members of his government alliance. In the last week he has been at pains to persuade DIKO not to quit the alliance, even though the party’s top members are the fiercest critics of his handling of the Cyprus talks. Why would he want opponents of the settlement he is allegedly pursuing to stay in his government? Could it be because he intends to keep talking without ever agreeing a deal, hence the opposition to time frames?
The president’s handling of the recession has verged on the ridiculous, with measures being announced one day and withdrawn after a few days because of political opposition. Some measures were not even thought through, with the government being forced to announce changes every time a weakness was pointed out. In fact, the president continued to waste taxpayer’s money on new welfare payments and arms for the National Guard long after we had entered recession and public finances were in dire straits. On Thursday Christofias finally mustered the courage to speak about the need for everyone to make sacrifices, which was a breakthrough. In a few months the government might even announce belt-tightening measures.
The low business confidence caused by the recession was exacerbated by the government’s fear of taking timely and specific action, which would have made people feel more secure and reassured them that the problem would be dealt with. The same is true regarding the peace talks – if Christofias had a clear strategy and pursued it single-mindedly, without pandering to the hard-liners every so often, he would not only have inspired confidence by showing he knew what he was doing but also would have gained more support.
Leadership is not about keeping everyone happy by fudging issues and pandering to everyone but by defining clear goals and pursuing them unwaveringly. We hope that after two years in office, Christofias will have realised that providing real leadership is more important than scoring high in the popularity ratings.
