Andreas Pirishis, a retired ambassador, believes Cyprus’ problems are rooted in a lack of introspection rather than just blaming foreign powers. He argues that emotional reactions sidestep responsibility, advocating for a more balanced approach to international relations that includes self-reflection.
What is the main cause of the Cyprus problem according to retired ambassador Andreas Pirishis?
Retired ambassador Andreas Pirishis believes the Cyprus problem stems from a lack of self-reflection, rather than solely blaming foreign powers. He argues that emotional responses evade responsibility and that assessing internal errors is crucial before condemning external forces, advocating for a balanced approach in international relations.
The Perspective of a Career Diplomat
Retired ambassador Andreas Pirishis provides an introspective look at the Cyprus problem through the lens of his extensive diplomatic career. Pirishis suggests that the persistent belief among Greeks that foreign powers are to blame for their national issues, particularly concerning Cyprus, is an oversimplification. This viewpoint holds that cynical governments and policy swayed by interests leave Greece isolated to deal with its problems—alone and friendless.
Pirishis, however, shares a more nuanced perception. Shaped by his active engagement over fifty years, including his start in Eoka at fifteen, and subsequently serving 35 years in the Cypriot diplomatic service, he believes the root of the issue lies in the inability to self-reflect. His stance is that emotional reactions lead to an evasion of responsibility and that self-examination is crucial for identifying and correcting one’s mistakes.
The Role of Foreign Relations
During his diplomatic tenure, Pirishis observed that after every setback, the blame was quickly cast on external forces. This knee-jerk attribution to the ‘international factor’ was often without substantial evidence, a mere emotional response lacking factual foundation. He argues for a more methodical approach where internal errors are assessed before condemning external elements.
Pirishis points out the irony in Cyprus frequently turning to the very countries it suspects for support in times of crisis. He highlights the contradiction in seeking political, economic, and even post-conflict aid from those same nations it often accuses. This dynamic underscores the complex interplay of trust and dependence that exists in international relations.
Interests Versus Values in International Policy
International policy post-World War II, according to Pirishis, is governed by a trinity of considerations: national interests, relations, and international law principles. He emphasizes that the prioritization of these factors is deliberate and reflective of their importance in decision-making processes. While it’s commonly believed that interests reign supreme, history provides examples where relationships or values have taken precedence.
Taking the special bond between the USA and Israel, or the UK’s support of the US during the Iraq invasion as instances, Pirishis illustrates that interests are not always the sole driver. Similarly, the relationship between Greece and Cyprus shows that mutual support can override individual interests, further complicating the web of international ties.
Reflections from a Veteran Diplomat
Andreas Pirishis’ insights stem from a lifetime of diplomatic service which included interactions with a spectrum of political ideologies and cultures. His experiences underscore a deeper narrative—one where the simplicity of blaming outsiders is challenged by the complexity of international relationships and the necessity for introspection.
His words aim to catalyze a shift in perspective, urging Greeks and Cypriots alike to consider their own contributions to their predicaments. By advocating for a balanced approach that weighs both internal shortcomings and external influences, Pirishis lays out a path towards a more self-aware and proactive stance in the international arena.
What does retired ambassador Andreas Pirishis believe is the main cause of Cyprus’ problems?
Retired ambassador Andreas Pirishis believes that the main cause of Cyprus’ issues stems from a lack of introspection and self-reflection rather than solely blaming foreign powers. He argues that emotional responses that blame outsiders evade responsibility and that it is crucial to assess internal errors before condemning external forces.
How does Andreas Pirishis view the role of foreign relations in the Cyprus problem?
Andreas Pirishis observed during his diplomatic career that Cyprus often quickly blames setbacks on external forces without substantial evidence, attributing issues to the ‘international factor.’ He advocates for a more methodical approach where internal errors are assessed before pointing fingers at external elements. Pirishis also highlights the irony in seeking support from countries Cyprus suspects while accusing them of causing problems.
What factors does Andreas Pirishis believe govern international policy post-World War II?
Andreas Pirishis believes that international policy post-World War II is governed by a trinity of considerations: national interests, relations, and international law principles. While interests are commonly thought to reign supreme, Pirishis points out examples where relationships or values have taken precedence in decision-making processes. He emphasizes the complexity of international relations and the interplay between interests and values.
What insights does Andreas Pirishis offer based on his diplomatic experiences?
Andreas Pirishis’ insights are based on his extensive diplomatic career that spanned over fifty years, interacting with various political ideologies and cultures. He challenges the simplicity of blaming outsiders for Cyprus’ issues and advocates for a more balanced approach that includes introspection and self-awareness. Pirishis aims to shift perspectives towards a proactive stance that considers both internal shortcomings and external influences in the international arena.
