THE ATTACKS by the two former DISY deputies, against the party that expelled them a couple of weeks ago, are set to continue until next month’s European elections. The two deputies – along with a third who walked out voluntarily and a former leader of the party who has joined them – have been firing daily salvoes against DISY, accusing its current leadership of being out of touch with its grass-roots support, of opportunism and of not having a policy on the Cyprus problem. They have also made a big issue out of leader Nicos Anastassiades’ letter to the European Parliament, complaining about the state’s attempts to influence voting decisions.
The DISY rebels have been stepping up their rhetoric against the leadership in a clear effort to win over as many of the party’s supporters in the Euro-elections which they will contest with their own election ticket. Open support by all the private television stations has given the rebels a big boost – as has their barrage of criticism directed against Anastassiades’ letter, by President Papadopoulos and the parties which support him. All this adds weight to the view that the rebels are being used by the presidential palace and its supporters to punish the DISY leadership for its ‘unpatriotic’ campaigning for a ‘yes’ vote in the referendum.
It is not even as if the DISY leadership has been proved conclusively wrong in supporting acceptance of the Annan plan. Making a decision that goes against the wishes of the majority is not proof that is was mistaken, as the rebels have been claiming quite disingenuously. If, for instance, there was a need to impose tax hikes and cut public spending because the economy was in big trouble, would the majority support these?
No, but a responsible leadership would have an obligation to impose them, because this is what is in the long term interest of the country. Would it be wrong to against the wishes of the majority of its members in this instance? According to the logic of the DISY rebels, the economy should be allowed to go bankrupt because that was the wish of majority of the people.
In the case of the Annan plan, the DISY leadership, responsibly, decided that the negative consequences of rejecting it would be far more harmful and long-lasting for the Greek Cypriots than the negative consequences of accepting it. It would have been much easier for the DISY leadership to put the party interests above the country’s – as AKEL had done – to ensure unity. But it did not and is now being punished for behaving in a responsible way.
The objective of the rebels and their backers is quite clearly to force Anastassiades to resign, and change the DISY’s position on the national problem, so that it is the same as that of government and the rest of the political parties.
It would be a tragedy for political life and our democracy if they succeeded, because public debate on the national problem would cease. A healthy democracy needs opposing camps, constantly engaging in public debate and countering each other’s arguments. Surely the DISY rebels recognise the importance of this.
