A POLITICAL storm erupted yesterday after President Demetris Christofias’ response on Tuesday to what he called “spreading pessimism” and “paying lip-service to unity” on the Cyprus issue, with tensions within government partner DIKO rising once more to the surface.
Responding to a speech by DIKO deputy and parliamentary spokesman Andreas Angelides during a memorial service at Nicosia’s Phaneromeni Church on Tuesday for victims of the 1974 Turkish invasion, Christofias said that he regretted hearing old slogans being repeated, and unity merely being invoked as a slogan.
In his speech, Angelides had appeared to cast doubt on the need to comply with the 1977 High-Level Agreement struck between the then President Makarios and Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash, which formally set the objective of an independent bi-communal federal Republic as the framework for a solution to the Cyprus issue, and which has survived as one of the main planks for negotiations on the issue to the present day.
Angelides said on Tuesday that “the unconditional continuation without objection of our self-commitment to the historic 1977 agreement has contributed and continues to contribute to Turkey’s taking advantage of our long-standing good will and consistency, indeed approaching it with the certainty that it will result in the serious eventuality, that finally there will exist a form of state opposed to (our) wishes.”
Speaking to reporters after the service, Christofias questioned whether the lessons of “the tragedy of 1974, the coup, the deaths, the missing” had been learned, and expressed his regret at hearing old slogans being repeated.
Saying that rubbishing of efforts to reach a settlement of the Cyprus issue was not likely to offer anything positive, Christofias added that “the invocation of unity has become just a slogan. When everything is painted black, then from that point on unity is just a slogan. I call for unity, but for genuine unity together with pragmatism, also fighting spirit, but at the same time realism too.”
Angelides’ speech appeared to cause problems for the DIKO leadership. On Tuesday evening, an official statement reiterated the party’s commitment to the 1977 and 1979 High-Level Agreements – as well as the relevant United Nations resolutions and European principles – as the basis for a solution, and said that references made by Angelides in his speech “were not consistent with the party’s firm and long-standing positions.”
Yesterday Angelides said that “if someone reads the content of my speech carefully, he will realise that I was referring to the fact that the Greek Cypriot side’s good will and the consistency it displays on the 1977 agreements have not got us anywhere, as Ankara is continuing with its methods.”
He added that he was not blaming anyone, but was simply voicing his opinion that Turkey “does not respect anything”, and so we should rethink our unity, objective and strategy on the Cyprus issue.
DIKO deputy chairman Giorgos Kolokasides leaped to Angelides’ defence yesterday, questioning how a party statement disowning his colleague’s speech could have been issued without his knowledge during party leader Marios Garoyian’s absence abroad.
Party spokesman Fotis Fotiou said later in the day that the statement had been issued “on Garoyian’s instructions” and reiterated that “members’ personal positions, even though long-held like those of Mr Angelides regarding the 1977 High-Level Agreement, cannot alter or adulterate the party’s fixed positions.”
Fotiou voiced DIKO’s own call for unity, saying that “we should set aside whatever divides us and collectively seek together to fashion a strategic and tactical framework that will decisively confront Turkish intransigence and the Turkish machinations”.
However, referring to Christofias’ “insistence on the proposal for a rotating presidency and weighted voting” as part of the current settlement talks – points repeated by Christofias on Tuesday during a two-hour interview on CyBC – Fotiou added that “proposals tabled during the direct talks which provoke divisive confrontations should be left in the past”, as they “neither serve the purposes of unity nor strengthen our negotiating position”.
