The second anniversary today of the failed Cyprus referenda to reunite the island, followed in four weeks’ time by the end of the parliamentary pre-election period, provides us with an opportunity to put the past behind us and move on, together, as Greek Cypriots, to start the long slog of persuading the international community that we do not have two heads but we do have legitimate concerns which need to be addressed if we are ever to reunite this “island of love”.
Not unlike the dark period of Britain’s Conservative party after it ejected Margaret Thatcher, we have spent the past two years in masochistic self-destruction, marked by recriminations between Yes and No camps: across parties, within parties, within families and among friends.
An optimist’s reading of this period is that it has been a necessary period of catharsis. But it has also come at great cost, namely a steep fall in the reputation of all Greek Cypriots abroad to the extent that no one is interested in our point of view any more.
How else could a prestigious organisation like the International Crisis Group feel comfortable producing a report that not only had glaring factual errors, but was also so out of touch with Greek Cypriot sentiment that it even upset the most ardent Yes-voters?
We have all played our part in this. The (domestically) terrorised Yes camp could not acknowledge that there was anything wrong with the Annan Plan. The (internationally) cornered No camp could not acknowledge there was anything right with it. And the (deeply disappointed) international community could not acknowledge that the failure to reunite the island could not all be blamed on one man.
Beneath the cacophony of extreme sentiments on all sides, the voice of the reasonable Greek Cypriot (whichever way they voted) has been lost.
Is there any way out? One little cause for hope was an Intercollege seminar two weeks ago to discuss the ICG report. At the risk of generalising from the particular (only a handful of Greek Cypriots from the Yes and No camps spoke), one could argue that there was a discernible shift in tone.
Yes-voters acknowledged that the Annan Plan did not address some of Greek Cypriots’ serious concerns. No-voters acknowledged that there were parts of the Annan Plan they could live with.
But more importantly than that, those using emotive language were gently urged by other participants to tone it down — even by those from their own ‘camp’. There was even the odd joke.
So there might just have been a realisation that branding each other as racists, Turk-lovers, nationalists or American money-takers has been getting us nowhere and is damaging only to ourselves.
If civil society has begun to forgive, in a few weeks’ time it will be the turn of the political parties: to bury the hatchet, revive the National Council as a true body for debate and work together to tell the rest of the world what kind of a compromise we could actually live with.
As opinion polls now show less than half of Greek Cypriots actually wanting to live with Turkish Cypriots any more, we know that time is of the essence.
