DISY is now naming Nicos Christodoulides as its main rival. However, all this time it has failed to explain why that is the case, by presenting its own different proposals and philosophy
Anita Dimitriou’s clarification that the party will not support Nicos Christodoulides in the 2028 presidential election and the statement that DISY will field its own candidatedid not come as a bolt from the blue. After all, the public has been watching for months as an internal party war rages over the nomination, with statements, leaked poll results, and jabs flying back and forth. However, the statement by the party’s vice president, Yiannis Karousos—which followed that of the president—was indicative of the confusion within the party. Making it clear that DISY’s main rival is Nikos Christodoulides, he warned that if he finds out that some people are at the Presidential Palace in the morning and at Pindarou Street by noon, or that some are supporting Nikos Christodoulides, he will name names publicly.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
I don’t know if Yiannis Karousos’s threats will have any effect or if they are consistent with a party that claims to be liberal. However, his remarks have brought deeper issues to the forefront. If, in fact, party officials have one foot in the Presidential Palace and the other on Pindarou Street, one issue that should concern DISY is the political integrity of its officials. What does it say about a party if its officials—who were promoted and put forward—are driven by such opportunism?
Because over the past few months, a power struggle has been raging between the Presidential Office and Pindarou. The President, for example, was poaching DISY officials to sow discord within the party and reinforce the impression that part of the “Alarm” faction is on his side. And DISY responded by creating new positions in its large shadow cabinet to appease them and bring them on board. Today, Yiannis Karousos argues that these loopholes must be closed. He is calling on anyone who wants to join any other candidate to come forward and say so. Except that just a few months ago, not only were officials who had been simultaneously appointed by Nikos Christodoulidis to quasi-governmental organizations being promoted, but those who had all their doors and options open were also being rewarded.
So if these officials are at the Presidential Palace in the morning and on Pindarou Street by noon, there is likely just as much confusion among the Synergist audience regarding the extent to which DISY is an opposition party. It is not just the cynical haggling over executive positions. Nor is it the deafening silence that DISY conveniently maintained throughout the entire campaign—a silence that reinforced the feeling that DISY and the government are no different in terms of policies and positions. Nor is it merely the fact that DISY and the Presidency are adopting the same narrative about the center-right.
It is the substance that matters above all else. If DISY wants to govern, it should have made it clear by now where it disagrees with Nikos Christodoulides’ policies and what it intends to do differently. What are its own policy proposals, and how will they be implemented? On the Cyprus issue, foreign policy, and the economy. For the time being, the public is watching to see that DISY and the Presidency do not disagree on the Cyprus issue. In foreign policy, they should be fully aligned with the strengthening of relations with Israel. On economic issues—with the exception of the energy issue—they must fully support Keravnos’s policies. And while a center-right party should have criticized a president who flirts with the far-right ELAM, it not only adopts some of his rhetoric but also seeks to claim a portion of his audience.
So today, DISY is making it clear that its main opponent is Nikos Christodoulides. But throughout the entire previous period, it failed to explain and instill in its supporters why this is the case. This is why not only is opportunism on the rise within the party, but it’s also becoming entrenched that the disagreement has nothing to do with policies, vision, or substance. But rather with the sheer ambition of individuals who believe the time has come for them to govern instead of others. They are therefore simply vying to seize the spoils of power, rather than to change the country through policy.
