The leaders of the two parties returned yesterday, trying to explain their positions, with Marino Sizopoulos making a historical review of the ICC and Andros Kyprianou wondering why EDEK remembered 38 years later to say that it was a NATO fabrication.
AKEL was the first party that came to react and comment on the decision taken last Sunday by EDEK.
Yesterday, Marinos Sizopoulos returned to answer in a press conference, noting that the decision of the EDEK Congress to reject the ICC and as a nomenclature "caused serious concern to various circles, who in their inability to justify their stance, try to deconstruct the position of EDEK ".
Characterizing as a danger the position that the rejection of the ICC leads to division, Mr. Sizopoulos pointed out that "the ICC leads to the division and the risk of total annexation of Cyprus to Turkey with the content that some had accepted in the Annan Plan and which are still discuss as a form and content of the intended solution ".
The leader of EDEK went one step further, substantiating his position historically, saying that "the ICC is a NATO structure with the obvious goal of dissolving the Republic of Cyprus. It was first promoted by Turkey in the 1960s and was officially adopted by the American-British factor after 1974 when their plan to overthrow the Republic of Cyprus with the Turkish invasion of 1974 and the imposition of a double union did not materialize.
According to Mr. Sizopoulos, "it is questionable that circles that appear as anti-NATO to support a NATO solution to the Cyprus problem." He called on both AKEL and the parties supporting the ICC to "make a trip to Bosnia, which is a NATO structure of a bi-zonal three-community federation" and which has been in a state of disintegration in recent years.
And naturally, Mr. Sizopoulos's reports provoked AKEL's reaction, with the party's general secretary being surprised why a politician, whom he considers modern, discovers arguments with a 37-year delay in order to support new and dangerous positions.
Andros Kyprianou wondered why so many years after the 1977 agreements, which were repeated, EDEK did not find that the ICC "is a NATO construction and leads to division, so we must send it to the outside fire and discover it today." Mr. Kyprianou's assessment is that the motives that guide EDEK are different, "which have absolutely nothing to do with the interest of Cyprus and the Cypriot people".
He reiterated his question whether there is anything better to suggest to those who reject the ICC solution. He went on to warn that such approaches "pose enormous risks to Cyprus and its people" and called on the parties to stop this debate. It is unfortunate, he said, that arguments are being made afterwards to support emerging positions.
He also referred to the decision of the National Council of 2009, which was, as he said, unanimous and EUROCO, which was the party that disagreed with the ICC, had asked for a footnote that it agreed with the public announced with the exception of the reference to the ICC. This seems to have bothered EDEK even more, which intends to return today to give more answers.
Source: FILELEFTHEROS