Our View: Without unity of purpose the national council is pointless

It has become something of a political tradition for opposition parties to call for a meeting of the national council whenever there is the slightest hint of possible movement on the Cyprus problem. Nothing much has to happen. It suffices for there to be a violation of the buffer zone, a visit by some UN big-shot, or visit of the president to New York for the opposition parties to start calling for a meeting of this advisory body which is at best a talking shop of the party leaders.

Now that the UN Secretary-General is about to formally announce the appointment of a special envoy to Cyprus with the brief of exploring whether there is common ground that would justify a resumption of talks, the leaders of Akel and Disy have written to the president asking him to call a meeting of the national council. What would be the purpose of such a meeting considering the earliest the special envoy would arrive would be in January and nobody knows what her agenda would be.

Government spokesman Konstantinos Letymbiotis said on Wednesday that a meeting of the council is called by the president “when conditions and developments are such that it is justified.” It is a fair point. Conditions and developments have not changed since the last time the council met to justify another meeting. Since his election President Christodoulides had called four meetings of the national council, said the spokesman. Was anything constructive agreed by the party leaders at these four meetings? Everyone knows the answer.

As an advisory body, the national council can be nothing more than a talking shop, at which party leaders state their positions that the president politely listens to – he may engage in a discussion – and subsequently ignores. This has always been the case, given that the respective positions of the parties on the Cyprus issue are often conflicting. For a council made up of all party leaders to have a real purpose, the participants need to be working for the same objective, something that has never been the case. There are party leaders that oppose a federal settlement dogmatically, others who support it, but reject all its provisions and then there are the pragmatists.

Without unity of purpose the council has no use other than as an excuse for the president to hide behind its ‘decisions’ when it suits him. When it does not suit him, he ignores it as he has no constitutional obligation to heed its advice. Why are opposition so keen to have a meeting now? Are they under the illusion that they could push President Christodoulides into adopting a flexible and constructive approach when the UNSG’s envoy arrives? The parties that elected him would never allow that, something he seems perfectly happy with.

If the party leaders want to put pressure on the president ahead of the arrival of UN envoy, they should do so publicly, because they must know by now that the national council is not a forum for meaningful public debate.