US Senator Rick Santorum once proclaimed that extremism in the leadership of political parties is seldom if ever rewarded. Santorum’s words may have been aimed at American political parties but has proved somewhat prophetic as far as the political scene in Cyprus is concerned. With its  leader Tahsin Ertugruloglu, Turkish Cypriot National Unity Party (UBP) has been steering dangerously to the extreme right at a time when the Cyprus peace process takes momentum. The party members and their supporters have even engaged in crusades in nationalist Volkan newspaper attacking anybody from their community who dares engage with a Greek Cypriot.  

But last week, leaders of the Turkish Cypriot National Unity Party (UBP) and the Democratic Rally (DISY) surprised everybody when they met for the first time on 28 May 2008. One if the many occasional shocks one receives from the complex political scene in Cyprus, the two conservative parties have long stood on opposing 'sides' of the Green Line and – unlike the Cypriot Left – have had limited contact, both representing an opposing nationalist monocultural views of the Cyprus issue. So what made UBP change its direction and why is it important for parties on the political right to be involved in the current peace process? 
 

HISTORICAL

Historically, the Greek and Turkish Cypriot left have always been in contact to mobilize Cypriots in support of peace and reunification. In the 20th century, most of the bicommunal activities on the island were organised by or had links to the Cyprus Communist Party AKEL and its affiliated trade unions. Even after the events of 1974, when Cypriots were effectively sealed off from one another communication between members of Greek and Turkish Cypriot left wing parties, trade unions and groups continued. Left wing parties north and south of the Green Line even went to such lengths as travelling thousands of miles to Britain to meet members of their “brother and sister parties.”  

Obviously, considering the Cypriot left overall were long under attack both psychologically and physically by Greek and Turkish nationalists who have long had the upper hand, the positive relations established amongst the Cypriot left during the worst periods of division and conflict were commendable for maintaining some degree of unity on a divided island, even if the base of that unity was ideological. Even if some would argue that it was the natural reaction of those attacked by the far-right to swing to the far left; undoubtedly it was thanks to the Cypriot left that the dream of a reunited Cyprus has been kept alive.

But the same situation cannot be said for Cyprus’ liberal and conservative parties. Firstly, because the Cypriot right until recently was synonymous with the far right. With a nationalist rhetoric unchallenged by Cypriots, often supported by foreign powers, the Cypriot right has taken longer to engage with Cypriots from the ‘other’ side. The Cypriot right for a long time were not constrained like political parties on the left by relations with Cypriots across the Green Line and therefore could play the nationalist card.  

MONOPOLY

Naturally, the proximity of the left and distance of the right in Cyprus created certain abnormalities as far as the search for peace was concerned. The left has long secured an uninterrupted monopoly of the concept of peace and reunification and also such notions as bicommunalism and the idea of Cypriotness. Ownership of these concepts, which elsewhere in the world were non-political became entangled in partisan politics in Cyprus. When I tried to introduce one left leaning Cypriot to a new non-party political bicommunal group, he frowned and retorted: “there is only one bicommunal group if you ask me and that’s AKEL!”

An unhealthy monopoly, this tradition has created expectations where parties on the right of the political spectrum are expected to keep demands that are unacceptable to the ‘other’ side and often extreme, on the table. What is more, since these parties, which have had little reason to change have long lived up to these expectations, non-left Cypriots who support reunification and who believe in a common sense approach to the Cyprus problem have always felt compelled to join the left or remain outside of politics.  
 

CHANGE

However, the world is forever changing, Cyprus is changing and therefore attitudes must keep up with these changes. Over the past few years, DISY with its new leader and through influence with the European Union (EU) has strived to recreate a modern European Christian Democrat Conservative Party. The party has even gone further, trying to establish positive relations with pro-solution progressive parties and groups in the north across the political spectrum. Realising the economic benefits of a Cyprus solution and the regional peace it would bring, DISY caters for an emerging progressive business class of Greek Cypriots keen not want to be left out from the benefits of peace and reunification.

Considering that DISY was once the bed of EOKA B supporters, the party’s leader Nicos Anastasiades deserves respect for separating Greek Cypriots on the political right from far right extremism. In repudiating extremism and a paramilitary past, DISY has shown its political maturity by committing itself to common-sense principles that lie beyond the usual partisan politics of Cyprus.  

A PLEASANT SHOCK… 
On the Turkish Cypriot side, the political landscape looks bleak as parties on the right like UBP habitually steer further and further to the nationalist right. Political dinosaurs, UBP members frequently attack Turkish Cypriots who meet or work with Greek Cypriots who they call ‘Gavur’ – a highly derogatory term for Greek Cypriots. Like its founder Rauf Denktash the party has long represented a non-solution and consequently the party and Mr Denktash were defeated and receded into the background of Turkish Cypriot politics.

Now faced with a new leadership challenge by the more rational and centrist Dr Dervis Eroglu and thanks to pressure applied by the Turkish government, UBP’s current leader Tahsin Ertugruloglu took a surprise decision to meet with DISY – formerly seen as unthinkable. For the first time in history, last week DISY leader Nicos Anastasiades crossed over to meet UBP leader Tahsin Ertugruloglu. Although in their three-hour meeting the two party leaders failed to find common ground, what is important is the meeting itself. UBP’s willingness to engage with DISY perhaps signifies the extent political parties will go to save them from political extinction when their positions become untenable. Like black clouds that portend a storm, UBP has effectively been told that they would be finished electorally if they do not change with the times.

Although we do not know the contents of their meeting, what is significant is that following the meeting, DISY leader Nicos Anastasiades stated that it was in the interests of both Cypriot communities for Cyprus as a whole to enjoy the fruits of EU membership while UBP leader Tahsin Ertugruoglu insisted their meeting would not be the last. It was a pleasant shock to witness the descendants of TMT and EOKA B now trying to find the common ground.  
 

PARTICIPATION IS KEY

A new strategy in an old game, Cypriots who believe in peace and reunification should not feel obliged to slot themselves into the left and bend over backwards to fit into its policies. A common sense concept, a Cyprus solution is beyond partisan politics.

The Cyprus issue is not a contest between communitarian values versus libertarian ones. No political party can ownership of a Cyprus solution. Linking a solution with political ideology will only serve partisan interests and not Cyprus. All political parties must participate in designing the new Cyprus.  No Cypriot who believes in peace and reunification, bicommunalism or who identifies themselves as a Cypriot should be labelled for being a Marxist / communist.  Similarly, liberals and conservatives who believe in reunification should not be tarred with the same brush that identifies fascism, which liberals and conservative equally oppose. Only a widening middle ground and consensus among Cypriot parties from across the political continuum can erode such political stereotyping.

Let us hope UBP will continue to engage with Greek Cypriot DISY and that other parties, like DIKO and EDEK in the south, will follow. Let us hope they see the advantage of joining the mainstream and engaging positively with the peace process. While neither UBP nor DISY may share the same views on a Cyprus solution this shouldn't inhibit their search for common ground and understanding, which in itself is an integral part of the peace process.