On Wednesday evening, the association “O Kormakitis,” in collaboration with the Maronite Scientists’ Network, organised an event titled: “The Maronite Community of Cyprus – The need for special treatment. What are its prospects for survival in the event of a solution to the Cyprus problem, and what are its prospects in the case of further prolonged delay in reaching a solution?”

I had the honour of being invited by the organisers to speak at the event, alongside Menelaos Menelaou and Ozdil Nami.

Please find below my speech, as delivered last night.

Dear friends,

I feel a certain discomfort in speaking about the claims of a community to which I do not belong. I must therefore begin with an apology. You are the ones best placed to know what is right, necessary, and just for yourselves and your community. I will simply offer a reflection on what I would advocate for, if I was in your position.

My brief intervention this evening is structured around three core parameters, which I shall outline before developing them further.

First: the preservation of collective identities requires investment. Without conscious and targeted support, a community’s identity is eroded and gradually absorbed by the dominant national group—in this case, the Greek Cypriots.

Second: the state is not neutral. The idea that the state can operate as a neutral arbiter, blind to the identities of its citizens, is a fiction. In practice, the state produces and reproduces the identity of the majority through its institutions—schools, universities, and the military.

Third: a community’s capacity to make claims is contingent upon how it is categorised. The rights a community may claim differ depending on whether it is recognised as national, religious, or migratory in character. Let us retain these three points: identity preservation requires investment; the state is not neutral; and a group’s classification defines its entitlements.

Identity preservation requires investment

Let us begin with the first parameter.

The survival of a collective identity is neither automatic nor assured. It is not guaranteed by good intentions, nor by expressions of admiration from the wider society. What is required is something far more substantial: sustained, material support; long-term strategy; and targeted investment.

By “investment,” I refer to a comprehensive policy commitment that enables a community to transmit its identity across generations. This includes investment in language, history, and cultural production, as well as in the social structures that foster cohesion: schools, parishes, associations, gathering spaces, and local governance.

This is particularly urgent in the case of the Maronite community, as it is a community with centuries of historical continuity on the island, one that possesses a distinct linguistic identity, which is recognised by UNESCO as part of the intangible cultural heritage of humanity. It is also a community that maintains historical ties with Lebanon, just as other communities in Cyprus maintain ties with Greece or Turkey. The Maronite community is therefore not a relic of the past; it is a community of the present that is striving for a viable future.

The assimilation of the Maronites into the dominant Greek Cypriot majority is not a hypothetical risk—it is an ongoing reality. Children of the community attend schools in which their history and language are either absent or tokenistically represented. It is therefore evident that state investment in the preservation of the community’s identity is an urgent necessity. Such investment must be multidimensional.

First, in history. Not with brief, two-paragraph references, but through the systematic inclusion of Maronite history and historiography in official curricula—not filtered through the Greek Cypriot national narrative, but as understood and experienced by the community itself.

Second, in culture. Through institutional support for festivals, cultural centres, publications, research projects, documentaries, ethnographic recordings, digitisation of archives, and all forms of cultural documentation.

Third, in language. Not merely through afternoon classes, but via structured primary and secondary education programmes, with certification, teacher training, and tailored textbooks.

The state is not neutral

Here we come to the second parameter: the state is not neutral.

Despite the insistence of political liberalism on the theoretical neutrality of the state vis-à-vis the identities of its citizens, historical experience demonstrates the contrary. The state is not a blank canvas. It is a mechanism that carries entrenched narratives, established hierarchies, and specific ethnopolitical preferences.

In practice, the state reproduces, reinforces, and protects the identity of the majority—not necessarily out of malice, but because it operates through a dominant national narrative that dictates the priorities of public policy. In the case of the Republic of Cyprus, this narrative is Greek-centric. The state functions in Greek, teaches the history of Greek Cypriot Hellenism, institutionalises its national holidays, adopts its symbols, and reproduces its cultural norms.

Public education exemplifies this bias most clearly. From primary school to high school, the curriculum revolves almost exclusively around the history, achievements, and sufferings of the Greek Cypriot population. Maronites—when mentioned—are portrayed through the lens of the majority, denied the right to self-representation.

This becomes even more critical when we consider the shape of the state after a political settlement. In a reunited Cyprus, the state will be bicommunal. Its constitutional architecture will recognise two national communities—Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots—as the only constituent partners of the new state. The constitution, institutions, rights, and obligations will flow from this bicommunal foundation.

Unless a special status is secured, the Maronite community risks becoming constitutionally invisible within the new framework.

Let me be clear: I am not proposing a change to the basis of the negotiations. I do not question the model of a bizonal, bicommunal federation, nor do I consider any alternative to be realistic. The federal model—especially after the last round of negotiation which brought us closer to a solution than ever—is the only viable route to reunification. Those who now speak of “new solution models” are, whether knowingly or not, perpetuating the status quo—a status quo that is anything but static.

Yet the acceptance of a bicommunal federation does not and should not entail the abandonment of the other historic communities of Cyprus. Within the new polity, the Maronite community can—and must—claim rights to collective self-determination, cultural preservation, and institutional presence. This is not a threat to the bicommunal principle; it is an affirmation of Cyprus’ multicultural character and the pluralism that sustains it.

Classification

We now arrive at the third—and perhaps most critical—parameter: the classification of a community determines the scope and nature of its claims.

Permit me to speak with utmost honesty. In the case of the Maronite community, the issue is institutional, and to a significant extent, constitutional. Under the 1960 Constitution, the community is not recognised as a national group, but rather as a religious one. And this changes everything.

The term “national community”—or more precisely, “national” in the sociopolitical sense—is not easily translatable to Greek as the word “έθνος” is used for both political and ethnocultural formations. For the purposes of this discussion, I use the term “national community” to refer to social and cultural collectivities possessing historical continuity, collective identity, and cultural self-awareness attached to Cyprus.

Classifying the Maronites as a religious group has serious and immediate consequences in that the community is not granted collective political rights. It has no say in the education of its children, no role in shaping cultural policy, no autonomous governance structures, and no parliamentary representation as an institutional partner of the state—only a non-legislative representative.

Thus, a community with centuries of presence, a distinctive linguistic and cultural identity, and a substantial contribution to Cyprus’ history and multicultural fabric, ends up being politically invisible.

If I were in your place—and I say this with humility and respect—I would advocate for a reclassification of the community. Not merely for symbolic reasons, but because the category in which a community is placed defines the rights to which it is entitled. I would seek either formal recognition as a national community, or at the very least, recognition as a cultural collective with institutional autonomy and competencies.

Let me reiterate: I am not proposing the establishment of a third constituent entity within the federation, nor a radical alteration of the bicommunal design. But that does not preclude the community from seeking institutional guarantees for self-governance.

One rational and realistic proposition would be to cluster the Maronite villages into a single administrative unit, with a jointly elected body. This local assembly or council could be vested with regulatory authority in specific domains: education, cultural affairs, land use, management of public resources, and participation in development projects.

Alternatively—if politically feasible—the community could seek inclusion within a special status framework under the Greek Cypriot community, with constitutional provisions safeguarding its cultural and linguistic autonomy.

If none of the above prove achievable, then the argument of historical restitution remains. The Maronite community was treated as a lesser child of the Republic. It was not afforded the opportunities its historical role merited. It was not granted the care it needed. It therefore holds the moral and political right to demand restorative policies.

Waiting for the solution

Most of the proposals I have outlined pertain to the status of the Maronite community in the context of a comprehensive political settlement to the Cyprus problem. Many of us—myself included at times—harbour deep pessimism regarding the likelihood of reaching such a settlement, despite the fact that the last round of negotiations brought the two sides within an inch of agreement. Yet every day that passes is another day in which the Maronite community is further exposed to the forces of assimilation. And it is important to underline that not all measures require constitutional overhaul.

Indeed, certain actions are both feasible and long overdue. A few months ago, Costas Constantinou of the University of Cyprus and Mete Hatay issued a policy brief, published by PRIO, in which they called for the return of the Maronite villages of Ayia Marina and Asomatos. This was previously agreed as a confidence-building measure, yet remains unimplemented. As Constantinou and Hatay argue, we should not be waiting for full and all-inclusive peace packages but rather proceed with measures that improve the lives of the people in Cyprus, including the Maronites in the present and in anticipation of a solution.

At the same time, the Maronite community—widely respected and with considerable social and political capital—should move beyond symbolic recognition and begin articulating concrete demands for participation in decisions that affect its cultural survival. These include, among others, the comprehensive inclusion of the community’s history in school curricula, as well as broader policies aimed at safeguarding the cultural continuity of the Maronites in Cyprus.

Multiculturalism as a defining attribute of Cyprus

Dear friends,

Reunification may seem a distant prospect to us all. But the ingredients exist, and should the conditions align, there may yet be an opportunity that must not be squandered. Yet reunification must not be built on the invisibility of smaller communities. It must not come at the expense of the island’s cultural diversity. It must not entrench a binary nationalism that silently erases the voices in between.

In the meantime, specific steps should be taken to promote the cultural continuity of the Maronites in the here and now.

In closing, let me be emphatic: the community does not need honorary speeches, nor folkloric tributes. It needs policy. It needs rights. The multicultural character of Cyprus must be preserved as a defining attribute—not treated as a deviation from the norm.

Thank you very much.