DISY is quietly turning into a party of special interests and opportunists, with few realizing the depth of its values-based problem
The Democratic Rally’s first-place finish in the parliamentary elections and the 27.1% of the vote it received did not merely give the DISY President the opportunity to strengthen her position as a leader in the political arena. It was also the perfect opportunity for DISY to make bold admissions. About what went wrong from Nicos Anastasiades’ administration to the present day. Why the party gradually turned into a center of vested interests. How it was eroded by power and constant scandals. This, however, is the ideal moment for DISY to clarify its objectives. Whether it differs—and in what ways—from the Christodoulides government, with which it shrewdly chose not to clash during the election campaign. And to explain to the voters who gave it another chance where it wants to take the country.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
It took only a few days, however, for an unprecedented behind-the-scenes maneuver aimed at the Speaker of the House to unfold. And to reinforce the sense of an awkward backroom deal from a bygone era between Nikolaos Papadopoulos and Annita Dimitriou over who would support whom and in exchange for what. And while it was considered perfectly logical for the president of the largest party to vie for the Speakership, what unfolded 24 hours earlier to secure the Speakership cemented in people’s minds that the lust for power has taken hold of Pindarou Street. Not because the party was vying for the Speakership with its leader. But because of what she was willing to do to be re-elected to that specific office. To drag herself—and the party—through the mud for a seat. To contradict herself and undermine the narrative that made the party the leading force: as the serious and responsible faction that turns a deaf ear to populism and doesn’t play games with the economy.
I don’t know how many party officials were ashamed to see their President echoing the nonsense of Fidias Panagiotou just to support her. We do know, however, that aside from Michalis Sophocleous, no one reacted. They’ve internalized the idea that the end justifies the means. And the distorted notion that the more seats a party secures, the stronger it becomes.
In this context, last week the behind-the-scenes story that led to the much-talked-about endorsement of Fidias Panagiotou also came to light. At a fish tavern, Averof Neophytou asked for support for Anita Dimitriou’s candidacy for Speaker of the House. She initially denied being present at the meeting but later confirmed it, raising issues of principle but, above all, of credibility. However, even here—with the exception of Haris Georgiadis and Giorgos Pamporidis, who, annoyed, stated the obvious, namely that non-party members cannot bind a party to a course of action in the presidential election, no one else reacted. The fact is that a party that should be guided by principles has ended up at the mercy of demagogues. Some lashed out at journalists, while others treated such gatherings and discussions as normal. Still others made one problematic statement after another. With Savia Orfanidou invoking the return of AKEL to power as a specter, it’s as if we were back in the days of McCarthyism. And Efthymios Diplaros is calling on Nicos Christodoulides to agree right now that whoever is left out of the race will support the other. In other words, the man who, according to the party’s campaign platform, will lead the campaign—and who should be explaining why anyone should support the DISY candidate— has openly called on Nicos Christodoulides to ensure that both sides will be in power.
Statements, positions, and a frenetic behind-the-scenes atmosphere have reinforced the view that the problem within DISY is deeply existential and rooted in values. It was once said that Clerides’ party was founded as a reaction to Spyros Kyprianou’s clientelist state. Today, it has become the very thing it was supposed to be fighting against. And it has now reinforced the following question in people’s minds: if a party is now so dependent on political positions, if it is manipulated by extra-institutional interests and personal agendas, how beneficial can it be for the country?
