By Christos Pourgourides
The situation in the Democratic Rally (DISY) has reached a breaking point. The wounds of the last presidential election remain open, and no effective cure has been proposed to date. The leadership is confining itself to aspirin-style measures that offer temporary relief from the pain...
Right choices and solutions
There is no doubt that the life of every individual and every organised group is determined, to a greater or lesser extent, by how right their choices are. For an individual, that means the choices they make. For an organised group, it means the choices of those who take the decisions. To put it differently, our lives are determined by how successful the solutions we opt for are in addressing the various problems we face. This holds true regardless of how each of us understands our freedom, and the limits placed on it by the social, cultural, economic and technological environment, and by nature itself.
Defining the problem
It is not possible to find the right solutions to a problem unless we define the problem correctly and identify the causes behind it. Usually, behind a problem lies a chain of symptoms and causes. True Greeks that we are, defining the problem is the most critical stage of decision-making or problem-solving, yet in practice we deal with it very little, if at all. Intuitive thinking is a distinctive trait of our people. As a result, we often fail to define problems correctly, whether personally or professionally, as individuals or as a society. And this is usually the cause of wrong decisions that we later regret.
It was therefore impossible for the DISY leadership to approach the problem in any way other than as true Greeks... All discussions were superficial, focusing on symptoms. And on personalities. Personalities are, of course, part of the problem, but not the most critical part of it.
Partisanship
The most critical part is partisanship, which has been the dominant feature of our political system from the death of Makarios in 1977 to the present day. It has been the foundation on which all parties have rested. It has had significant consequences for the functioning of democracy, the governance of the country, the state, policy choices and the development of the economy and society as a whole.
This element, partisanship, was both the result and the cause of the rise of many political rulers and very few political leaders. At best, the fundamental logic of partisanship for decades consisted of identifying the common good and the public interest with the interest of the party. At its worst, the interest of the party took precedence over the interest of the homeland.
The party’s mission
In practice, this means that the party’s reason for existence, or its mission, is first and foremost its own survival and the acquisition of ever greater strength, influence and power. This is the precondition for satisfying the interests of the ruling group first, namely the leader and his circle of immediate trusted supporters. Next come the individual or collective interests of party members. Last come the individual or collective interests of its voters or, rather, its party clientele.
This is how a caste of officials, professional politicians, was created in the “governing” parties. They became specialists in serving the party clientele, and their sole concern was power. After all, without power, favours cannot be delivered.
The downward path
In the 1980s, DISY grew while it was being persecuted. In the 2020s, enjoying the fruits of power, it began to shrink. Instead of seeking the causes of this decline, once again the discussions were superficial, fit for the football terraces.
The leading figure in this lowering of the tone was former DISY president and former President of the Republic Nicos Anastasiades. Together with his “cronies”, he blamed the fall in the party’s share of the vote on his “incompetent” successor, Averof Neofytou.
Scandals and corruption
While the main cause was clearly partisanship, he and his close associates had led to significant scandals and instances of corruption. In the perception of the average citizen, these remained unpunished in order to avoid political cost to the party.
Of course, Averof Neofytou is not without responsibility. To avoid cost to the party and to himself, he remained silent on several occasions when he should have spoken out, and with a clear and strong voice. Beyond the scandals and corruption, he also remained silent when crimes against the country had been committed, whether deliberately or through gross negligence, in the handling of the Cyprus problem, such as those at Crans-Montana. He was also silent about the remarks the President of the Republic of Cyprus made to various people about a two-state solution.
The then Turkish foreign minister insists that our President made such a remark to him, but I do not consider that a proven fact. However, the conversations with the late Archbishop Chrysostomos II and S. Hasikos, as well as with many others still living in Cyprus, are proven facts. And when Turkey knows that a former President of Cyprus is casting a favourable eye on a two-state solution, it would have to be stark raving mad not to insist on such a solution. But I have strayed from my subject. Wherever my thoughts go, they end up at the Cyprus problem.
The defections
Partisanship also led to the defections of 2023, which have not been eliminated and will continue to plague DISY in the upcoming presidential elections too, unless bold solutions are adopted. A party official cannot publicly declare that they will not support the candidate the members choose for the presidential elections, while the party leadership believes that such behaviour can be dealt with through dialogue.
Nor can the party go into the presidential elections with realistic prospects of success when another senior party figure publicly declares that we have no ideological differences with President Nikos Christodoulides. And this statement goes unnoticed by the leadership. Ideology means what a party believes. So if we believe the same things as Christodoulides, why are we contesting the elections with our own candidate? For the spoils of power?
But if we offer him the presidential chair, he will grant us all the spoils lavishly. Nor can the party’s candidate have any chance of winning if the party’s public announcements continue to be written in the same style and with the same content. Were Victoras Papadopoulos to write them, they would be more critical of the works and days of Nikos Christodoulides!
