It is healthy to avoid partisan rigidity and to foster a diversity of opinions. However, it is dangerous that opportunism tends to be rewarded.   

Last week, Elena Kousiou became more widely known as the news was dominated by her political future and the choices before her. The former President of KOAG—who was in fact reappointed by President Christodoulides— a member of the DISY Political Bureau and a recent candidate for the party in the upcoming parliamentary elections, has now also assumed the role of DISY’s deputy press secretary. This news might have gone unnoticed had media reports not portrayed her appointment as a “show of strength” by Annita Dimitriou against President Christodoulides. And, of course, if well-meaning observers had not portrayed her appointment—whether to the Presidential Office or to DISY—as a victory of one camp over the other.

No one has any reason to question her abilities, which obviously make her a bone of contention between DISY and the Presidential Office. However, this incident was revealing of how politics is now conducted. The blurred lines of what is permissible and what is ethical. And how politics is evolving exclusively into a contest to impress, to see who will claim the trophy. Ultimately rewarding opportunism.

Since Ms. Kousiou claims that she did not accept the appointment precisely because she belongs to the opposition, then she must explain why it was acceptable to her—and to her party—for her to remain president of the KOAG until the parliamentary elections. An organization that is an arm of the government.

One might argue that a ministerial appointment—which was ultimately the position of Commissioner for Citizens’ Rights—is one thing, and the presidency of a quasi-governmental organization is another. However, when a party is in the opposition, its leaders do not have the luxury of independently choosing what is harmless to their party—or, more cunningly, what is beneficial to themselves. In politics, there is consistency in matters of principle; there are collective decisions that, logically, should be upheld; but there are also codes of ethics. 

The President of the Republic was the first to fail to respect these ethical codes. When a party chooses to be in the opposition, it cannot make a habit of sounding out its own officials.

This instills in people’s minds the idea that the priority is not selecting the most capable individuals, but rather those whose presence in the government will enable them to drive a wedge between their own parties. Trapping some close to him, blackmailing others into remaining in the government, and attempting to weaken those who choose to oppose him.

However, just as this does not reflect well on the President, DISY’s handling of the situation does not reflect well on the party either. An entire party cannot play this blackmailing game of who will get the spoils. And this applies not only to Ms. Kousiou but also to the recent appointment of Poly Kourousidis immediately following reports that he had allegedly been sounded out for a ministerial post.

What, then, is the message that the other party officials—who until now have respected collective decisions—are supposed to take away from this? Who have remained loyal to the party, and because of that loyalty, no one has ever approached them in a way that would undermine their party? We are now witnessing a political system that rewards those who have all doors open to them. Where offers are made not to the most capable, but to those who send the message that they are generally available. Where people weigh their options based on what suits them best. And those who negotiate the terms of their political careers most aggressively are the ones who rise to the top. It is obviously healthy to avoid partisan rigidity and to allow for diversity of opinion and disagreements within a party. However, it is dangerous how party patriotism has mutated so abruptly into extreme partisan opportunism.