Our View: Conference for diaspora crying out for changes

The gathering of Cypriots of the diaspora in Cyprus has become an August fixture. This week’s Ninth World Conference of Expatriate Cypriots has attracted close to 280 participants and was the biggest ever said the government spokesman Konstantinos Letymbiotis, addressing the opening of the conference. He told the conference that the forging of a national strategy for the diaspora “constitutes a priority for the government and for the President of the Republic.”

The government, said Letymbiotis, was “working on a variety of ideas to upgrade our communication with you, so that we can bring you closer to us, but also so we can come closer to you.” Cypriots abroad should be kept informed about what was happening in Cyprus in terms of culture, education, and history. It was a valid point, which, by accident, highlighted the one-dimensional policy of successive governments in dealing with the diaspora.

To this day, the relations of governments and the diaspora centre exclusively on the Cyprus problem. The world conferences have been dominated by the Cyprus problem, with our politicians briefing the delegates about the latest, so-called developments and the delegates giving their opinions about the situation. It is a closed club that shows little interest in dealing with anything that is not Cyprus problem-related and this suits the small group of people that have protected their positions by monopolising the conference.

Cypriots that are doing well in the professions, who have contributed to the society in which they live and should be acknowledged by the country, are largely ignored by the conference. Young people, with different concerns from the old guard are marginalised. The young and professionals could be invited to address the conference and share their experiences, but the organisers do not seem interested in such Cypriots, because they are not Cyprus problem experts. Yet it is by having overseas Cypriots with different backgrounds and interests, people who have distinguished themselves in their respective field, sharing their experiences that would make the conference much more diverse and interesting.

It is such members of the diaspora the government should upgrade its communication with, invite a few of them every year as conference guests to offer a different viewpoint than the traditional one, that we have been hearing for years. The government should be commended for opening a channel of communication with the young delegates of Nepomak. A meeting was arranged at short notice with Letymbiotis to whom the young voiced their concerns and made a critique of the conference.

This is what could be described as a positive development. It remains to be seen whether the government will take on board the suggestions of the youngsters as part of its plans to improve and broaden the scope of the conference. The old guard may resist, but it must be made to understand that the current format of the conference must change to attract more people and especially the younger generation.