Interview with the General Secretary of AKEL Stefanos Stefanou
Sunday 22 February 2026 ‘Simerini’ newspaper
“Israel is weaponizing Cyprus”
“The government serves plans without considering the dangers”
QUESTION: With AKEL celebrating the 100th anniversary of its foundation, what do you consider to be the Party’s historical footprint on Cypriot society and what is the biggest challenge AKEL faces today in the new technological and political reality that is evolving?
SS: AKEL is a party with 100 years of experience, with a rich and long history of service and struggles for our country and society. Whether one agrees or disagrees with AKEL, one cannot but acknowledge that it has sealed the greatest gains and the most important rights that workers and Cypriot society have fought for and won. It is the steadfast, consistent, and robust political force that has consistently defended the common people, workers, the vulnerable groups of the population, and those in need. It is the Party that has always been at the forefront of the struggle for the freedom of our homeland and for our people’s vindication.
The great challenge AKEL faces today is to reaffirm in practice that it is the force of the working people, the force of the many, the force of society. It does so in an environment where the narrative of “they are all the same” is reinforced,
AKEL is called upon to prove itself. The answer to this challenge is our own positions and proposals, the daily political work we develop that yields results because, in practice, we are not all the same.
If we were “all the same,” when AKEL supported borrowers against foreclosures, there would be no parties constantly defending the big interests of the banks.
If we were “all the same,” when AKEL demanded transparency and accountability on cases involving entanglement and corruption, there would be no political parties obstructing it.
If we were “all the same,” foreign funds would not be given the ‘green light’ to seize people’s assets, because they would be blocked by AKEL’s opposition.
There are hundreds of examples that prove that AKEL is struggling consistently for society, while other forces protect powerful interests. This is exactly what we ask of society: instead of passively accepting what everyone says, it should sit down and evaluate us all on the basis of our proposals and actions and compare us. We are not afraid of such a comparison taking place, because we know that the verdict we will receive from a large section of society will be positive.
QUESTION: The latest poll conducted by ‘Sigma’ TV on the parliamentary elections puts AKEL in first place with 17%, at a time when 58% of citizens say they are disappointed with politics and 75% believe that the country is moving in the wrong direction in terms of the functioning of its institutions.
How do you interpret AKEL’s lead in this climate of widespread mistrust, and is AKEL’s goal to be in first place at the end of the road?
SS: I am sure that every AKEL supporter feels very good when they see their Party in the first place in polls. This shows that, despite the fluid political scene and the discrediting that is reproduced and promoted in various ways, AKEL’s actions in favour of society and the country are highly appreciated and resonate. This satisfies us, but it does not lull us into complacency. A large section of society is struggling, tormented and suffering as a result of the high cost of living, poverty, inequalities and the inability of many people to make ends meet.
We are turning our lead in the polls into strength to continue our work for society. Beyond that, of course, I want to stress again that polls do not record the election result, but are a reflection of the specific period in which they are conducted. Therefore, we should not be complacent about the results of polls, but instead we should intensify our actions even more.
Our electoral goal is to emerge stronger from these elections, and the polls show that this is entirely possible.
QUESTION: A large section of society is calling for a change in the political party landscape, with emerging forces, at least in the polls, such as ALMA and Direct Democracy, recording remarkable momentum. Could ALMA (which claims to be “social democratic” and to uphold the “healthy elements of the liberal right”) be a realistic potential partner with an eye on the 2028 presidential elections?
SS: Everyone can define themselves as they wish, but what really reveals what each person stands for is who they support with their positions and proposals, if they have any positions and proposals, of course. Because, unfortunately, we have reached the point where electoral formations and individuals are vying to win seats in Parliament with their sole qualification being their social media posts or by simply denouncing everyone and everything at a time when part of society is ready to believe anything.
The main goal of politics is to solve problems and respond positively to challenges in order to achieve progress in the country and in people’s lives. That is precisely why the decisive factor in politics are your positions and proposals, not soundbites.
You ask me about the presidential elections, but now is not the time to discuss them. We currently have parliamentary elections, and that is where our focus lies. Everything in its own time.
QUESTION: The far-right ELAM party appears to be establishing itself on the political landscape as the third biggest political force, with Cyprus being no exception to what is more widely being observed in the Western world with similar political ideologies. Why do you think people are giving electoral power to forces beyond the centre-right and not to the left?
SS: ELAM, as a branch of the far-right ‘Golden Dawn’ party in Cyprus, has established itself for a number of reasons.
Firstly, because it has been ‘normalized’ by political forces other than AKEL. We can all see the paradox when, for example, the President of the Hellenic Parliament and the President of the Hellenic Republic refuse to hold a meeting with ELAM precisely because they know that it was founded as a branch of a criminal organization, but in Cyprus, the doors of the Presidential Palace are open to ELAM and political parties cooperate with it.
This is because ELAM is a reserve force for serving anti-social policies and powerful interests. It is the force whose votes re-elected Mr. Anastasiades and elected Mr. Christodoulides to the Presidency of the Republic, and also DISY President Ms. Dimitriou to the Presidency of the House of Representatives.
ELAM provides the votes that the establishment needed to close the Cyprus Cooperative Bank and, as has recently been proven, represents the backbone/pillar of the Christodoulides government in the big videogate scandal. In exchange for these services, ELAM has gained access to centres of power in order to gain influence.
Secondly, the rise of the far right is due to the crisis conditions modern societies face, which are the result of the neoliberal policies being implemented that widen inequalities and poverty.
AKEL insists on standing firm against the far right, defending democracy, social progress, and ultimately the prevalence of temperance and reason over hatred, fanaticism, and populism.
QUESTION: The political “divorce” from Irene Charalambidou was by no means amicable and took on strongly personal characteristics. AKEL spoke of her “unbridled ambition.” What exactly do you mean by that? At the same time, Ms. Charalambidou insists that an internal (party) memo was circulated concerning her “behaviour” and, as she claims, it aimed at her political destruction. Was there such a document or not?
SS: Everything that needed to be said on the matter has been said, so we will not be pursuing it further. For us, the struggles we are fighting for society take precedence, and we also have the battle of the parliamentary elections to wage ahead of us. That is what we are focusing our attention on.
QUESTION: With 64% of citizens believing that the Cyprus problem is moving in the wrong direction and with the recent freezing of the talks, as stated by the Personal Envoy of the United Nations Secretary-General on Cyprus María Ángela Holguín Cuéllar, does AKEL feel vindicated for its stance towards Tufan Erhürman (Note: the new leader of the Turkish Cypriot community)? What would be a realistic strategy to put the Cyprus problem back on track towards a meaningful solution?
SS: First of all, we should say what we were saying so that we can judge the same thing and not what each of us has in mind. What did AKEL say about the vote in the occupied territories? We stated that an outcome of the vote would be positive if it would convey the message that the Turkish Cypriot community stands in line with the solution for the reunification of our homeland and people, as opposed to Turkey’s position for a two state solution, as expressed by (former Turkish Cypriot leader) Mr. Tatar.
We said that it is important for the Turkish Cypriot community to have a leader who supports the resumption of the negotiations and a dialogue, positions that Mr. Tatar also rejected. We noted as positive the fact that Mr. Erhürman had emerged as the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community, but at the same time we argued that difficulties lay ahead because Turkey plays a decisive role in the solution of the Cyprus problem.
When we talk about a solution to the Cyprus problem that will provide for the end of the Turkish occupation and the reunification of our island and people, there is only one feasible solution. It is the one we agreed on in 1977 and have been negotiating ever since. It is the solution based on a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality, as described in the relevant Resolutions of the UN.
If we attempt to discuss anything else this will lead with mathematical certainty to partition. The safest way to achieve a solution of liberation and reunification is to continue and make our efforts and initiatives to break the deadlock and continue the negotiations from where they left off take on a specific content, preserving the entire negotiating acquis (body of work) and making use of the Guterres Framework. This is precisely where we must focus our efforts on.
QUESTION: Given that the geopolitical situation in the region remains extremely fluid, with neighbouring states at war and Turkey continuing its revisionist and expansionist policy, AKEL continues to maintain that the Republic of Cyprus must sever its relations with the Government of Israel, even if, at least temporarily, there is a convergence of interests (with Israel) being formulated against Turkish strategy, given that Israel is the only regional power that can act as a deterrent against Turkey?
SS: First of all, I would like to point out that we have never talked about severing relations with Israel. There is no such issue, because we have never expressed such a position. What we do criticize is the Christodoulides government’s persistent support and cover for Netanyahu and his regime. We must not forget that Netanyahu is accused by the International Court (ICC) of committing war crimes because he is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people.
How can we go to the international community and denounce Turkey’s invasion, occupation, and colonization of Cyprus when, at the same time, we support a government that is committing the same crime in another country?
That is what we are saying.
As for the theories that the Christodoulides government is hinting at and some are openly supporting, that Israel will supposedly come to our aid against Turkey, these are nothing but dangerous illusions. Israel serves its own interests attacking neighbouring countries and committing war crimes, and it will never act as Cyprus’s bodyguard. Israel is weaponizing Cyprus for its own plans, and our government is unwittingly serving this policy without considering the dangers that are being generated to our country.
Consequently, our position on Cyprus’ foreign policy is that we should develop relations with all states, pursue a multidimensional policy that will build bridges and not destroy relations with traditional allies in the international arena. We should implement a policy that will not tie our country to interests that will ultimately be detrimental to Cyprus itself.
QUESTION: In a recent announcement it issued, AKEL used the term “bootlicking” to describe Foreign Minister Constantinos Kompos’ attitude towards US President Donald Trump. Does your criticism concern President Trump’s personal policy or Nicosia’s overall strategy of alignment with Washington?
SS: The first question that the Foreign Minister, the President, and the Government must answer is the following: on what basis do they place such trust in the American President?
A President who decides one morning to send commandos to kidnap the President of another country, violating every principle and concept of international law?
A President who threatens other states that their turn will come and who unleashes trade wars against any state that does not follow his orders?
All of this—and much more—which the international community virtually unanimously condemns and rejects, our own government calls a “decisive approach” to international relations!
Is it from these approaches that our government expects Cyprus to find justice? Or perhaps from the “Board of Peace” where Mr. Trump sets and changes the rules, an organization that not only disregards the United Nations but seeks to replace it.
So what guarantee is there that a President who operates in this way, and who never misses an opportunity to praise Erdogan, will act in Cyprus’s interests and that the government can expect him to “save” us with open arms?
The government must answer these real questions and not confine itself to engaging in communication games to serve domestic consumption purposes.
