Cyprus-Forum.com

[brother]

Two years on but 20 years in the past


PRESIDENT PAPADOPOULOS swept to power two years ago as the candidate of a three-party coalition and promising to bring “big and substantive change”. The “government of change”, as it called itself, completes two years in power this week, but will have little cause to celebrate. Papadopoulos may have seen off the Annan plan last April, thanks to a partisan and deeply divisive campaign, but he has not had an easy ride since, despite the Republic becoming a full member of the EU.

In fact membership has not been the panacea everyone had been expecting, with the Commission forcing the government to make a series of concessions to the Turkish Cypriots that would have been inconceivable a couple of years ago. There have been ongoing rows with the Commission, the government threatening to take it to European Court over plans for direct trade with the north, but on other issues – individuals entering Cyprus through illegal ports and crossing south – it has been forced to abandon its old positions.

It has been gradually coming to terms with life in the EU, even though society, for years accustomed to different practices, will need longer to adjust as the protests by an assortment of professional groups from farmers to truck-drivers indicate. Membership has also forced the government to take measures to reduce the large fiscal deficit it had inherited from its predecessors, but more will need to be done over the next few years if we are to stay on course for eventually adopting the euro.

In short, some change has been imposed on us by EU membership, but what about the “big and substantive change” that Papadopoulos and his government allies had promised? Have they kept their promise in the two years they have been running the country, even assuming that some things never change? For instance, the nepotism that the president had pledged to eradicate on the night of his election is as widespread as it has always been – only the beneficiaries have changed. Ministerial accountability remains unheard of, the concept of open government has not yet arrived while big projects such as the upgrading of the airports, building of marinas and the introduction of a national health scheme continue to be plagued by indecision and bureaucratic delays.

Yet there has been “big and substantive change” in the two years that Papadopoulos has been in office. Unfortunately the “change” we have witnessed could not be described as positive, as it has been change for the worse. The clock has been turned back 20 years in the way politics are conducted, with everything reduced to black and white, good or bad. The government alliance adopts dogmatic positions and shows no tolerance to criticism or the expression of views different from its own. Political debate has been replaced by a deleterious exchange of accusations and mud-slinging as disagreement is shunned.

An opposition politician who makes a legitimate criticism of a government decision, is guaranteed to become the target of a concerted onslaught by the government and the alliance parties take turns to question his patriotism, his ulterior motives, and sometimes, his honesty.

Anyone who questions Papadopoulos’ actions is automatically accused of undermining the presidency and of serving foreign interests. This intellectual intimidation, which has also been adopted by the pro-government media, reached its climax with the notorious witch-hunt – legitimised by the supported of the president himself – of citizens who had received UNOPS funding for bi-communal projects. There can be no rational political debate or a constructive exchange of ideas about anything in such hostile conditions.

This simplistic and backward approach of ‘us and them’ – if you do not support government dogmatism you are by definition an enemy – has deeply divided the country. Papadopoulos has played a big part in this by publicly attacking citizens who had voted in favour of the Annan plan in April, instead of trying to unite people after the referendum. Even the unity he has been calling for is marked by intolerance as it has to be on his terms – uncritical acceptance of his decisions and the premise that he knows what is good for the country.
This confrontational, arrogant style has also been employed in the government’s dealings with the outside world. It is again a case of ‘us and them’. Countries that do not embrace the government’s positions, or show sympathy, rightly or wrongly, for the plight of the Turkish Cypriots are seen as enemies, publicly disparaged in a way that encourages a siege mentality at home.

We are re-living the absurd scenarios of the Kyprianou years when Greek Cypriots, supposedly, pitted themselves against a world that was plotting the destruction of Cyprus. This gives rise to xenophobia, which is another form of the intolerance cultivated by the government.

Even in its dealings with the Turkish Cypriots the government an shows arrogance and intolerance which is a throwback to the Kyprianou years. This is the “big and substantive change” that President Papadopoulos has introduced in his first two years in office. After 10 year of the Clerides government, during which we made great strides of forward, in creating a pluralist, open and tolerant society, we are now faced with a government hell bent on turning the clock back because it obdurately refuses to come to terms with the modern world. Was this the kind of “big and substantive change” people voted for two years ago?

I felt this was a good editorial and would like to know from my GC compatriots what they think, is there in your opinion any truth to it?
Do you feel this clipping hits the nail on the head etc.?

[cannedmoose]

I also thought it was a well-crafted piece, but then again I'm not GC.

[brother]

Its a pity that none of our GC compatriots on the forum who are usually full of life are not letting us in on their thoughts about this piece.

[boulio]

how subjective is this piece(by the way who exactly published it)when it does not mention the number 1 coulprit in this whole sitution,turkey.

[brother]

It was published by the cyprus mail.

[boulio]

then its not very subjective brother,you cant blame t-pap on everthing and give turkey a blank check,the author should have known this.

[Saint Jimmy]

Hmmm...
I agree with what the author is saying, but I, too, think he or she is being a bit... over-simplistic? 'The Clerides decade was heaven and now we're heading to hell'. It can't be like that. The only area where this analogy can be made and be valid is the foreign relations domain. T-Pap fucked up in that respect, but maybe there was no other way of doing what he had in mind (which, in turn, may or may not be wrong; time will tell).
Other than that, the Clerides administration is being over-praised here, I think. We still had farmers out on strikes, etc. back then. But it did keep me happy on the foreign policy issues.