SOCIAL LENS

Tracing the Spark as Investigators Zero in on the Deadly Limassol Fire

The investigation is weighing multiple possible scenarios. Former Fire Department director Markos Trangolas, speaking on Politis radio’s “Second Look”, explained that these range from accidental ignition to intentional arson.

Header Image

FILIP POLO

The devastating fire that swept through the Limassol mountains has been placed under the microscope of American specialists, who have now identified with precision both the starting point and the likely causes of the tragedy. 

A team from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was brought in to assist Cypriot authorities. Using a sophisticated simulator, the experts reconstructed the outbreak of the blaze, factoring in humidity, terrain, distance from residential areas, and the speed of its spread. Their findings, already presented to the President of the Republic, confirm the location of ground zero, the exact spot where the fire began, while their full report on the causes is expected imminently. 

Competing Scenarios 

The investigation is weighing multiple possible scenarios. Former Fire Department director Markos Trangolas, speaking on Politis radio’s “Second Look” program, explained that these range from accidental ignition to intentional arson. 

Among the causes under consideration are electrical faults in nearby infrastructure, discarded cigarette butts, or the spontaneous ignition of accumulated rubbish. Another scenario points to the presence of an illegal dumping ground, which has triggered similar fires in the past. 

Trangolas also drew attention to the deliberate element. “Looking at it through the eyes of an arsonist, I am led to believe this may very well have been the work of arsonists,” he said. Garbage dumps, he added, often provide the conditions for a fire to spread rapidly, making them an attractive target for those seeking to cause damage. 

Local Knowledge, Foreign Tools 

The use of advanced American technology has lent weight to the findings, but Trangolas was quick to emphasize that Cyprus also has capable officers and the know-how to conduct such investigations. “The country has the expertise,” he said, pointing to the chief fire officer and other senior staff in the department who are trained to carry out expert assessments. 

His comments underline a wider debate about the resources and authority available to Cypriot civil protection services. While external assistance can strengthen an investigation, local officials argue that Cyprus should not be perceived as lacking the ability to determine causes on its own. 

Responsibility and Preparedness 

Beyond the technical analysis of the blaze, the former fire chief was clear about the issue of accountability. Preventive responsibilities, he said, fall squarely on district administrations and community councils, which must ensure proper waste management and fire safety measures in vulnerable areas. “Those who hold responsibility must accept it,” he stressed. 

Trangolas also renewed his long-standing call for the creation of a Deputy Ministry of Civil Protection, saying that the coordination of multiple services during large-scale disasters is “extremely difficult” under the current framework. The absence of a centralized authority, he suggested, continues to leave gaps in Cyprus’ ability to respond effectively to crises of this magnitude. 

The Next Step 

With the ATF report pending, the spotlight remains on whether the fire was the result of negligence, systemic failures in prevention, or deliberate action. For families mourning the victims and for communities scarred by the blaze, the findings will be more than technical—they will be a measure of accountability. 

As the country waits, the investigation also raises a larger question: whether Cyprus will continue to react to disasters as they come, or whether the lessons of this fire will drive the creation of stronger structures for prevention and response. 

 

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.