Galery

1

Anastasia Balezdrova 

Spiros Rizopoulos is an expert in strategic planning and communications, founder and owner of the company Spin Communications. In recent months, he has commented on the political developments in a lively manner through his personal blog. Recently, his media presence in some of the biggest international media has been particularly intense.

GRReporter turned to him for comment too.

Mr. Rizopoulos, how would you comment on the election results of 6 May? 

We wrote in our blog back in February that holding elections would be a tragic mistake and would lead to instability. Our position was that the office of Lucas Papademos should remain at the head of state until 2013. Moreover, he himself had to understand that we had not made him prime minister just for him to sign a voluntary debt cut but to try to protect the political system from collapsing, even with the help of a plaster. That is because the country would be destroyed. What we were not able to see was that if the European Union were to keep us alive with loans, it needed an interlocutor. And one cannot exist in a period of political instability. It creates uncertainty, which repels the others from us in turn.

The return to the drachma is something that has been discussed for years now, not only by us ourselves but also by others about us. The political instability has allowed this discussion to go beyond our country. All this is due to the fact that all Greek parties, without exception, cared only about their party interest. In this framework and without any ideology or party programmes presented, the vote of citizens has become a vote of revenge. The result of this process, which we fully expected, was a huge surprise for the rest of the Greeks.

I think the main loser in the negotiations to form a government with the participation of all parties is the leader of Independent Greeks Panos Kamenos. In any event, smaller parties, which cannot exist in periods of stability, are supposed to make such blunders in times of crisis. Therefore, such people cannot be leaders. It is easy to be willing to have a parliament, involving dozens of parties, but the case of Panos Kamenos must teach the Greeks that this would cost them. Even the change of the political system through the infusion of "fresh blood" is carried out in times of stability, not because everyone has decided to oppose something. However, when we are angry we do not have the time for ideologies. If you do a poll today, asking about Alexis Tsipras, nobodywould know what to answer. Rage does not yield election results of stability.

How would you comment on the rise of the radical left SYRIZA?

I do not agree with the results announced immediately after the election polls, which indicated that SYRIZA was the first choice of voters. I think it is still early to make conclusions. I do not think his position during the attempts to form a government will cost him nothing. Furthermore, from a bipartisan system Greece has found itself in an almost bi-polar system. On the one side is Alexis Tsipras, who cannot tell us what the alternative to the memorandum is, the ideology he expresses, whether he wants the return of the drachma, or what his plan for development is. On the other side are the two major parties, which for some reason unclear to me, did not aim their "arrows" at him in time. Nobody ever asked Alexis Tsipras the right questions. The attempt that New Democracy and PASOK made to limit the debate was a crime. The danger should not be ignored. You have to look at it and expose it.

Alexis Tsipras is a representative of what I call the "sick part" of Greek society. These are all those who are trying to attach to someone who is promising that wages would remain the same, there would be no layoffs in the public sector, that public enterprises would be reformed, and so on. He has covered all this with a beautiful veil and by saying that he is the enemy of restrictions. No! Alexis Tsipras represents that part of society that wants to make sure that absolutely nothing will change and if possible, to get the money from the loan without making any progress. I think the task of the others is quite easy. They just have to remind us that this is not a feature of the average Greek. The average Greek wants the abolishment of the status of permanent employment in the public sector, reorganization of state-owned enterprises, establishment of a fair tax system and finally, a party that will present a real development programme. I think it is really possible to renegotiate the Memorandum. I like the logic that when we are given five euro, three of them will be to cover our current needs, and the remaining two will be for development. Then, we will have to admit that we do not know how to achieve development and will ask for assistance in this regard. In other words, at the next elections, Greece will have to choose an interlocutor for the European Union.

Will the failure of political leaders to form a government affect or change the vote of citizens in the coming elections?