By George Koumoulli
Tatar and all Turkish Cypriot nationalists must rub their hands with joy that the policy of three Greek Cypriot parties, DIKO, EDEK and ELAM, is fully compatible with theirs, which is the two-state solution.
As we all know, EDEK and ELAM are in favour of a unitary state. Even the chicks of the poultry farms do not believe that such a solution is feasible in 2022 in Cyprus. The absurdity in this case “hits red” and it turns out that an irrationality gives birth to other worse ones. The history of Cyprus is a chain of political absurdities, but let us confine ourselves to the present day. Undoubtedly, the leaders of EDEK and ELAM are not stupid in insisting on a utopian solution. They are claiming the unitary state, in their full knowledge that such a solution is not possible, in order to torpedo the ILO and to arrive at the two-state solution desired for them, which will ensure a purely Greek state in the South. For these parties, this scenario is preferable to the federation, in which we would share power with our fellow Turkish Cypriots.
The ambiguous policy of the DIKO on the issue of the IDF (which it accepts but with the “right content”) leads to the conclusion that, in reality, it is against the ILO unless, of course, there is unhindered Greek Cypriot sovereignty – a position that has been made clear by many party officials. Therefore, the DIKO, like EDEK and ELAM, aims, even unconsciously, at the two-state solution. The DIKO’s position on the IDF was eloquently expressed by its MP Pavlos Mylonas, in the CyBC program “From day to day”, on Fr. Monday, who said verbatim: “We disagree with the IDF, it is the ritual process of suicide of Hellenism in Cyprus”. I hope that Tatar did not hear this comment, because gleaning himself to texts on the need for a two-state solution would make up a very heavy weapon in favour of his positions, in favour of consolidating partition. I feel sorry for the easy-going voters of the DIKO, who, from election to election, are pedalling the sea of unfulfilled hopes and expensive expectations, without catching a port.
The ideology of all nationalist and National Socialist parties around the world is to preserve the identity of peoples and nations, according to the specific characteristics of each people, and to cooperate between nations as opposed to the idea of a superstate (such as a federal Europe) with mixed populations. It is this ideology that is pushing these parties into good cooperation. Therefore, the common goal of the nationalist parties of Cyprus, on both sides of the dividing line, namely DIKO, EDEK, ELAM, with the National Unity Party of Tatar, which is the creation of two nation states – one purely Greek and one purely Turkish – should not be surprising.
It is remarkable that cooperation and mutual respect between the nationalist parties is also unwavering in the European Parliament, especially in the parliamentary group of the Europe of Nations and Freedom. The joint concurrence is forged at conferences, symposia and rallies organised by the far-right parties. From the headquarters of the National Front party, a triumphant Marin Le Pen announced the other day the launch of a “patriotic” international “movement”, which “cannot be stopped”. It is also worth saying that, after Brexit and Trump’s victory, Le Pen and other far-right politicians celebrated the “victory” of nationalism, with Le Pen stating, somewhat prematurely: “2016 was the year that the Anglo-Saxon world woke up. In 2017, I am sure that the people of continental Europe will wake up.” Italy’s Salvini made the same statement. Dutch far-right leader Wilders celebrated the “huge consequences” of the referendum, declaring that the people need “a national identity”. Frauke Petry, leader of the AfD, “wept with joy.” In Greece, Golden Dawn spokesman Elias Kassidiaris called “brave the decision of the British people to say ‘no to the hawks’ of Brussels”. In Cyprus, ELAM declared “Brussels’ anti-national policy was hit by the Brexit victory, while it proposed CYPEXIT (Cyprus’ exit from the EU). Specifically, ELAM stated: “in the future, consideration should be given to the possibility of holding a similar referendum, so that the people of Cyprus can decide whether or not to remain in this Union, which is nothing like the Europe that we were once given and dreamed of”.
The internationalisation of fascism is not a modern phenomenon. This was pointed out by the famous writer George Orwell in 1937. “Fascism is now an international movement, which means not only that fascist nations can work together for the purposes of looting, but that they are groping, perhaps only half-consciously yet, towards a global system”, (Cf. “The Road to Wigan Pier”, G. Orwell p.138).
It would be a major omission not to mention the Blessing of the Church to the aforementioned parties, with which it is ideologically and politically related. Church, nationalists and National Socialists share common national visions. The justification for this support, according to the Metropolitan Bishop of Pafos, is that “they always act according to the will of God”. Not being competent to ascertain the party preferences of the Most High, I fail to comment on this statement.
