Galery

1

Anastasia Balezdrova

During the critical voting in the Greek parliament last Wednesday, 32 SYRIZA MPs did not support the agreement with creditors. A cabinet reshuffle followed that removed the far left ministers and simultaneously strengthened the involvement of the coalition partner, Independent Greeks, in it. This coming Wednesday will face the MPs from the radical left with the second big test. They will be invited to vote on the first series of austerity measures and another outflow of government MPs will be possible again.

So far, their number is unclear as well as if it will question the credibility of the government and to what extent. However, their apparent tactic is "I will not vote for the measures but support the government."

At the same time, the first attempts of the cabinet to avoid the strict conditions of the agreement are already noticeable. Earlier today, sources from the Ministry of Finance said that they were seeking ways to prevent the representatives of the supervisory Troika from entering the building and reviewing the state of the Greek economy. It has also become clear that measures such as the elimination of early retirement and taxation of farmers have been withdrawn from the bill that will be voted on Wednesday.

The excuses on the part of SYRIZA MPs that "we do not support the agreement but had to accept it" are jeopardizing the stabilization of Greece’s situation and increasing the risk of Grexit, as stated by economic adviser and commentator George Prokopakis. In an interview with GRReporter he warns that the deepening alliance between SYRIZA and Independent Greeks, and the silent consent of Golden Dawn are posing threats to Greek society.

Mr. Prokopakis, do you think the government is able to implement the serious measures that are envisaged in the agreement with creditors?

I do not think so and I would even add that in no case is it able to do so. The cabinet reshuffle is one of the signs that it is intending to implement no serious measures, except those that apply with a ministerial signature. I.e., wage cuts, tax increases and so forth. The government in question will do absolutely nothing to implement the reforms. Its composition is highly non-reformist and elections seem to be in store. The plan is to give the alliance between SYRIZA and Independent Greeks some time to strengthen its position and announce elections at a later stage. I do not know if they will be held. However, the cabinet has certainly a pre-election composition, as was the case with the last Samaras’ cabinet after the reshuffle in June 2014 when populists entered it and all attempts to push for reforms were suspended.

The voting on even more severe measures will take place on Wednesday. Is it likely for the government to be intact after the voting and to what extent?

I do not know if it will be intact. The feeling is that an even larger number of SYRIZA MPs would not support them and that the number of MPs who support the cabinet might drop below 120 from the initial 162.

If the 106 MPs from the pro-European parties (New Democracy, PASOK and Potami) vote in favour of the measures and the number of SYRIZA and Independent Greeks MPs who support them is 110, for example, the sum will be a very strong majority for them. As I understand it, according to the Constitution, the government continues to enjoy the confidence of parliament in such a situation. Neither party will submit a no confidence vote, therefore, there will be no problem, but only formally.

However, there is a problem and a huge one though, in political terms and in fact. Because if this situation continues, with SYRIZA MPs not supporting the bills and arguing that they support the government, the Prime Minister will be forced to solve it at one point. This mockery must stop because a government that is an opposition to it itself cannot get very far.

How would you define the actions of the opposition? Is its position correct? What actions should it take according to you?

I have argued from the beginning that this fictitious national unity is a very big mistake. The position of pro-European parties to vote on all the bills related to the agreement is actually a non-political position and it is providing no way out of the situation.

My opinion is that the 39% positive vote in the referendum was a loss on the one hand but it was a very high, consistent and firm rate on the other, in view of the harsh conditions under which the voting took place. Moreover, objectively it is higher than the 36% with which SYRIZA won the elections in January.

Instead of "presenting" Tsipras with those 39%, the pro-European opposition would have to use them as a condition for the creation of a solid pro-European front that would have not allowed games with early elections, which Tsipras is playing for the time being. Not to mention that this percentage was achieved without any central intervention. I.e., it could have been much higher if there were a specific politician to head the positive vote. Therefore, in my opinion it is a mistake that the opposition is giving the "white check" to the government in terms of "political blackmailing".

The moment that the government obtains the necessary majority in parliament, although only 123 MPs of SYRIZA and Independent Greeks are likely to support it, the opposition can say, "We are for the adoption of measures but because the Prime Minister is not making any concession we will not take part in the voting." This will force the cabinet to pass the measures by a majority of 194 MPs. In this way, the message of the opposition to Alexis Tsipras will be, "Go ahead, secure the votes of the remaining 98-100 members that you need and vote. We will support the implementation of the measures but will not vote in parliament." Things will be clear in this way. Now he is just hiding behind his finger, as if Juncker, Schaeuble etc. do not know that last week’s 229 votes in favour of the measures mean nothing because the government has no support. Anyone from SYRIZA who wants can topple it any time. If the pro-Europeans in SYRIZA and the pro-European opposition reach no agreement, there will be no stability.

How do you see the role of Alexis Tsipras in the subsequent political events? He remains the most popular Greek politician even after the conclusion of the agreement.

Such was the goal from the outset. All efforts were focused on the establishment of Peronism in Greece: distinguishing a popular leader who is followed by all, no matter whether they have left or right views. You simply accept yourself as a "man without a shirt your back" ("deskamidados" in Argentina) and stand behind Tsipras, and only God knows what he is doing.

Now it seems that the political solution for Greece passes through settling accounts inside SYRIZA. If Tsipras does so, a solution will probably come from the pro-European part of SYRIZA with the help of the opposition, regardless of whether there will be elections or not. However, the voting of measures in which SYRIZA does not believe, the rhetoric of ministers against them and the suggestions like "let us take the money and disappear" are taking things towards a complete impasse.

The bad thing for Greece is that here we have no politician like Winston Churchill to take matters into his hands. Alexis Tsipras is drawing the image of a young and uncorrupted politician, but he has done nothing on the other hand, even with regard to the implementation of the measures that are supposed to have been proposed by the government from the outset. Citizens have felt no pressure from the government of SYRIZA whereas the same government is signing the worst measures we could imagine. This is the oxymoron and I do not know what the basis of his popularity is. But if he does not clear SYRIZA, regardless of the direction, to enable the partners, creditors, opposition and citizens to understand what is happening, the situation will continue to be deadlocked.

The government is apparently trying to gain time. It has even shifted the deadline for the submission of tax returns to late August. If this week goes smoothly, without disruptions, no one will know anything until September. And if no other measures are taken in addition to the VAT increase, which can be felt in commodity prices, Tsipras will try to ride this wave of temporary popularity, convene elections, win them and impose his domination. But, I repeat, as Tsipras, not as SYRIZA or as left politics. And this is very dangerous, as I have already given the example of Juan Peron. Because the whole scheme involves people such as the leader of Independent Greeks, who are organizing in Syntagma folk festivities with banners of Byzantium and nationalist songs. This is raising doubts as to whether one is a national socialist or democrat and to what extent. We thought we had left behind this madness over the past 30 years and it is now threatening Greece’s geopolitical position and role in the region. And all this is only happening for someone to win the elections and be in a good relationship with the fans of conspiracies of Kammenos and the nationalists.

I would like to digress to say how dangerous and strange it is and how dangerous the alliances are, which are probably being concluded. This is the reason for my concerns that have made me say for a long time that signs of Musolinism could be noticed. Indicative of this is the fact that Golden Dawn did not take advantage of the referendum to promote its positions. They did not use the time on TV to which they were entitled by law to expose their views nor did they send representatives to the polling stations. In fact, they hid but also did what they wanted. A meeting of political leaders was held a day after the referendum and the leader of Golden Dawn was not invited but it did not react in any way. All this time when politics was moving in a good direction for them they said nothing and hid, not to scare people. What people? Those who are categorically against fascism although they supported the negative vote. I do not know whether it was the product of a political agreement with someone from the government or just politics on the part of Golden Dawn. I hope it was only the latter. However, we could not pretend we did not hear Nikos Michaloliakos saying upon tabling the agreement in parliament, "Comrades of the Left, you have betrayed us." Who wins and who loses in this situation? What can we expect from the far right tomorrow? Will everything be the fault of the severe measures or of those crazy people who are helping the far right in their attempt to win an unnecessary and stupid referendum? So far, the situation is good, to say, but when people encounter difficulties in their daily lives due to the severe measures, as will happen in a few months, then we will understand the meaning of the snake egg Golden Dawn and who has hatched it. Then again, there will be charges against Schaeuble and the others. But who will play the role of Schaeuble at that time? Here we have a pure political move in the same direction.

Has the threat of Grexit passed?

Of course, it has not. It is constantly before us. Even the bridge loan that was granted today actually has double collateral and both "packages" are to the detriment of Greece. One of them is the profits from Greek government bonds that are held by the European Central Bank and used as guarantees. And because different European countries want to be protected in the event of Grexit, part of the EU budget intended for Greece is bound as collateral. Therefore, what we formally see in the documents is that all fear Grexit.

As things here are developing in a bad direction, there might be Grexit as a result of an accident. The situation is now safe thanks to the fact that the European Central Bank continues to allocate liquidity, but there will be some limit on it as well.

At present, deposits in Greek banks are to the amount of 120 billion euro and the liquidity from the Emergency Liquidity Assistance, the guarantees and the direct funding from the European Central Bank amounts to over 125 billion euro. As a result, the Greek banking system is absolutely unstable. If action is not taken to return the money to banks, trigger the economy, etc., a process that will last for months, the risk of Grexit cannot disappear.

It happening on the basis of a "political" decision has been avoided, which was the proposal of the German finance minister, namely to exclude Greece from the euro zone for five years.

There is also a political fear. When the Greek government is not doing anything, what response can be expected from the parliaments of the euro zone? Many of them have permitted the launch of negotiations on a third rescue programme, Memorandum Number 3. It is also a very risky process and the risk of Grexit in it is present at any time