Ulaş Barış writes..."AKEL, CTP, and the Unnecessary Divides…"

The other evening, I attended an event organized by the Peace Association in the buffer zone, where former negotiator Özdil Nami and former AKEL General Secretary Andros Kyprianou were the speakers.

First and foremost, I feel obliged to send my greetings and love to the Peace Association and its dedicated members. Even when all hope seems lost, when good news appears to be postponed indefinitely, they continue to keep the flame of peace and a solution alive, regardless of rain or shine. Their efforts are invaluable.

Now, back to the event—what stood out most was the deep difference in vision between the two speakers, which also revealed the significant differences between their respective parties.

Let’s not beat around the bush: it would be incorrect to assume that AKEL and CTP are two formations that think alike, move in the same direction, or will act the same on the Cyprus issue.

In fact, this is not a new development. A quick look back at the April 24, 2004 Annan Plan referendum makes this clear.

But let’s set aside the past. Even today, there is no consensus between these two parties.

I could substantiate this with multiple examples. For instance, in October 2022, a meeting at the leadership level discussed forming a joint committee to work collaboratively on solving the Cyprus problem. Two years later, that committee is nowhere to be seen. Aside from the occasional social gatherings, official engagements between the two parties remain stagnant.

Most recently, the leaders of both parties met last week. The meeting was held quietly, and no press statement was issued.

I voiced my criticism on social media, arguing that with New York around the corner, the island’s most significant advocates for a federal solution should have issued a joint statement.

It turns out things were quite different, and we were left in the dark.

At the event, Özdil Nami spoke first. He elaborated on CTP’s recently unveiled five-point plan for resuming the negotiation process, a topic I also covered in my latest article. The plan calls for a federal solution, with a set timeline, arbitration, results-oriented negotiations, and consequences for failure to return to the current status quo.

Nami’s presentation was clear and concise, with a well-defined perspective. Then, it was Kyprianou’s turn. He trotted out familiar, tired arguments, placing the blame for the lack of a solution squarely on President Christodoulides. He claimed that the root of the problem lies with Christodoulides and even made a remark along the lines of, “We will have to wait 3.5 more years.”

Sitting there, I could feel my frustration rising. When the Q&A session opened, I posed a question to Kyprianou:

“How does AKEL view CTP’s new modality, which essentially embodies a ‘do or die’ approach? While it carries many risks, could this be the solution we’ve been waiting for?”

My question was not immediately answered, as they took questions in bulk. However, my inquiry prompted some Greek Cypriot participants to criticize the plan, calling it an unacceptable modality and questioning Nami on the potential consequences for Turkish Cypriots should the process derail. Nami patiently explained the scenarios, referring to the growing dominance of the Turkish Cypriot community within the partnership state and the potential risks to their EU rights and funding. I feel compelled to add here that this echoes recent remarks by Greek Cypriot Foreign Minister Kombos, who warned that if Turkish Cypriots insist on a two-state solution, their EU citizenships could be jeopardized.

As I posed my question, a Greek Cypriot journalist friend sitting behind me teased, “Good job, but you won’t get an answer.” I replied, “I won’t leave without one.”

Eventually, Kyprianou got around to my question. After evading the topic for some time and talking about resuming negotiations from where they left off at Crans Montana, he finally dropped a bombshell:

“I’ve heard about CTP’s proposal before. Speaking for myself, there is no way any president of the Republic of Cyprus, including me, would ever accept it.”

And just like that, the mystery of why no joint statement was made after last week’s meeting was solved.

There is no shared vision between CTP and AKEL on how the solution should unfold. Their agreement only extends to the name of the solution—federal—but beyond that, they diverge.

CTP asserts that there is no more time to wait, that the problem must be solved now, proposing what amounts to an atomic bomb solution. In contrast, AKEL is essentially saying, “Let’s wait until Christodoulides is out of office and our candidate is elected—maybe in 3.5 years.”

If no one has told them this before, I’ll do it now: with such an intransigent mindset, they won’t win an election in 3 years, or even 30. The Fidyas fiasco in the last elections serves as a perfect example.

The supposed renewal ideas of AKEL’s new General Secretary, Stefanos Stefanu, announced when he took office, have been thrown into the trash. Like CTP, AKEL now views the Cyprus issue solely through a domestic political lens, effectively burying the problem under a blanket of inertia.

I wish both parties were more active, more committed to the universal values of the left, while also feeling the need for renewal. But that hasn’t happened.

What has happened is a focus on preserving comfort zones, avoiding initiatives on the Cyprus issue, and leaving the situation to the right while building all strategy around winning power domestically.

This quiet wait for power has brought us to a brick wall.

This situation has not only inflicted irreversible wounds on the future of all Cypriots but also fostered deep mistrust.

But I must give credit where it’s due: CTP has at least stirred into action with its recent New York visit and five-point plan for restarting negotiations.

Despite its risks, CTP’s move has sparked excitement within the community, and yesterday, 33 unions and organizations issued a joint statement supporting a solution. The statement not only rejected the two-state solution but also declared, “This is not our will. We stand for a federal solution.”

These are positive, hopeful developments.

We expect the same from AKEL and from all pro-solution forces in the south.

It’s time to set aside domestic politics and focus on foreign policy.

We have no other home to go to, and no other home to share!

The solution lies in the common ground of all Cypriots.

The historical mission to achieve this falls primarily on AKEL, CTP, and all forces advocating a federal solution.

Wake up! This is the last train, and if we miss it, not only will the island remain divided forever, but the north will ultimately become a place where cars with “83” license plates drive on the right side of the road.

I can’t even begin to imagine the dangers this scenario poses for the south...