As the election campaign draws to a close and only a few days remain before the polls open, one thing can be said with certainty, regardless of the final result.
The real beneficiary of this long pre‑election period has been the far‑right formation ELAM.
Not because it persuaded voters with its arguments, views or positions, but because the particular conditions that emerged, with the appearance of new political formations and, above all, numerous fringe candidates, allowed it to avoid becoming a central topic of political debate. It remained largely unchallenged and was therefore not exposed for the deeply divisive, anti‑democratic and racist ideas it promotes. This development has enabled it to conceal its true character and continue misleading voters, attracting support through populist and pseudo‑patriotic rhetoric.
Under normal circumstances, the rapid rise of the far right in Cyprus should have been the dominant issue of the campaign. It should have been at the forefront of attention for all parties within the democratic spectrum, as well as for citizens themselves.
All should have focused on the risks posed to democracy, to society, and to efforts towards resolving the Cyprus issue and achieving reunification through the strengthening of the far right. They should also have worked together to contain it. Instead, they not only failed to do so, but in many ways facilitated its rise by focusing on other matters.
The strengthening and entrenchment of ELAM, a neo‑fascist formation, as what appears to be the country’s third political force, with only a small gap from the two major parties, represents a deeply troubling regression.
ELAM is not simply a populist far‑right party of the type occasionally seen in Europe.
It is not only the local offshoot of the criminal Greek organisation Golden Dawn. It is the political descendant of those who led to the events of 1974, a veiled political vehicle of neo‑fascism in Cyprus, a formation that challenges fundamental human rights and freedoms, rejects the bicommunal character of Cyprus and opposes the peaceful coexistence of its two communities.
Unfortunately, through short‑sighted approaches and poor judgement, we appear poised to elevate this construct, through our vote, into a decisive force in the country’s political life, potentially enabling it to pursue its next objective, which is none other than assuming, directly or indirectly, a role in governing the country, with all that this entails. And for that, we all bear responsibility.
