In recent developments, Christos Christou, leader of the National Popular Front (ELAM), admitted to a 2007 conviction for illegal gun possession in Greece.

This admission came after the president of the Movement for Social Democracy (EDEK), Marinos Sizopoulos, highlighted the conviction during a televised debate. Christou's confession not only brings his integrity into question but also raises serious concerns about the political landscape in Cyprus, particularly given ELAM's controversial connections and its pro-Enosis stance.

ELAM and Its Radical Roots

ELAM, a far-right nationalist party in Cyprus, has long been associated with extremist views. Its ideological roots can be traced back to the Greek far-right group Golden Dawn, which has been legally designated as a criminal organization. Golden Dawn's notoriety stems from its involvement in a range of criminal activities, including violent attacks against immigrants, political opponents, and members of minority communities. The group's leadership has been convicted of running a criminal organization, with its members implicated in several murders and other violent crimes.

Christou's association with Golden Dawn, particularly as a member of Nikos Michaloliakos's bodyguard team, underscores the radical elements within ELAM. Golden Dawn's extreme nationalist ideology and its use of violence to achieve political ends highlight the dangers posed by such affiliations. The pro-Enosis ideology shared by both ELAM and Golden Dawn directly opposes the interests of the Turkish Cypriot community and threatens the delicate balance required for peaceful coexistence on the island.

EDEK's Position and Pro-Enosis Sentiments

EDEK, while not as radical as ELAM, also harbors pro-Enosis sentiments. The party's historical stance on Cyprus has included support for the island's union with Greece. Although EDEK has moderated its position over the years, its past and occasional present-day rhetoric still reflect a preference for a Hellenic identity for Cyprus. This stance can alienate the Turkish Cypriot community and exacerbate intercommunal tensions.

Questioning the EU's Role

As a member of the European Union, the administration in South Cyprus is expected to uphold democratic values and human rights. The presence and influence of radical elements like ELAM within its political framework raise questions about the EU's oversight and the mechanisms in place to prevent the rise of extremist groups. The tolerance of such parties undermines the principles of inclusivity and peace that the EU stands for, and it is crucial for the EU to address these discrepancies to maintain stability and trust within its member states.

The Need for a Two-State Solution

The recent revelations about ELAM's leader highlight the persistent threat posed by radical elements in Cypriot politics. These developments underscore the urgent need for a pragmatic and peaceful resolution to the Cyprus issue—one that acknowledges the realities on the ground and prioritizes stability over nationalist fantasies.

A two-state solution offers a viable path forward. It acknowledges the distinct identities and governance needs of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities. By establishing two sovereign states, this solution can prevent the kind of intercommunal violence that has plagued Cyprus in the past.

Historically, Cyprus has witnessed significant intercommunal violence, particularly during the 1960s and 1970s. The violence culminated in the Turkish intervention in 1974, which resulted in the island's division. The roots of this conflict can be traced back to competing nationalist aspirations—Greek Cypriots seeking Enosis and Turkish Cypriots seeking Taksim (partition). A two-state solution directly addresses these conflicting aspirations by providing each community with self-determination within their respective territories.

Preventing Future Conflicts

Preventing future outbreaks of violence in Cyprus requires addressing the underlying causes of intercommunal strife. Radical elements, such as those within ELAM, thrive on nationalist fervor and can easily incite violence if left unchecked. By formally recognizing two states, the international community can reduce the influence of these radical groups. It would also provide a clear framework for cooperation and conflict resolution, reducing the likelihood of misunderstandings and violent escalations.

Furthermore, a two-state solution can facilitate economic and social development in both regions. By allowing each community to govern itself, resources can be better allocated to address local needs and priorities. Economic interdependence and cooperation between the two states can also foster a climate of peace and mutual respect.

The recent admission by ELAM's leader of a past gun conviction, and the party's connections to radical elements like Golden Dawn, highlight the ongoing risks posed by nationalist extremism in Cyprus. 

Golden Dawn's criminal activities and violent ideology, mirrored in ELAM's actions and affiliations, represent a serious threat to the safety and stability of the Turkish Cypriot community. Both ELAM and EDEK's pro-Enosis positions contribute to intercommunal tensions.To prevent future conflicts and ensure lasting peace, a two-state solution is essential. It recognizes the realities of Cyprus's divided society and offers a framework for peaceful coexistence, addressing the root causes of historical violence and paving the way for a stable and prosperous future for both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots.