Alexis Tsipras: “The impact of authoritarian regimes will be destructive for Europe”
Alexis Tsipras: “The impact of authoritarian regimes will be destructive for Europe”

On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the restoration of democracy in Greece and the 10th anniversary of his election, the country’s left-wing former Prime Minister, Alexis Tsipras, speaks exclusively to Libération about his country’s European path and warns against the complacency of certain ruling political forces in the face of the rise of the far-right in Europe.

You were born in July 1974, four days after the fall of the junta. You are a child of democracy. How do you see the 50 years of Greek democracy?

Greece has a particularity: after the Second World War, a civil war followed, at a time when peace had returned in other European countries. Then, until 1967, Greeks lived under a pseudo-democratic system, characterized by the persecution of any resistance, especially communists – who were declared illegal. This was followed by the dictatorship of the colonels from 1967 to 1974, which fell due to pressure by the people of Greece, mobilized in two landmark events: the uprising of the Polytechnic University in November 1973 and the tragedy in Cyprus in July 1974. With the restoration of democracy in 1974, civil liberties were guaranteed and people could now live without being under constant police control and without facing suppression of their beliefs and ideas. In addition, the Communist Party became legal.

 

This democratic transition was made possible only thanks to popular pressure for a genuine democracy. It is a process that carries the mark of the Left and its struggles. It was accompanied by a cultural boom influenced by great left-wing artists, such as Mikis Theodorakis and by a wave of popular participation and democratization in social and political life. But times are changing, as are the actions of forces in the political field. Authoritarian regimes used to be imposed by the military and enacted absolute censorship – today, authoritarian forces can impose their views by other means, such as controlling the media and the Internet and spreading fake news …

 

Two parties, PASOK and New Democracy, dominated the political scene for a long time. Also, mainly through three large families (Papandreou, Karamanlis, Mitsotakis…). Did this system contribute to the crisis that Greece descended into in 2010?

There is something strange about modern Greece, where three families played a leading role in creating a clientilistic regime. Of course, they were elected by the people. In any case, Greece succeeded in its democratic transition, but failed in its economic development goals. The country has failed to take advantage of the opportunities opened to it to push forward a sustainable process of economic and social modernisation, especially after its accession to the EU.

 

Its growth from 1974 until today has only been on average around 1.3% annually. In 1974, Portugal, Spain and Ireland had a much lower per capita income than Greece. Now they’ve overtaken us. In the EU, only Bulgaria is doing worse than Greece, in many areas. In short, because of this culture of power being retained in the hands of some families and because of political clientelism, Greece has failed to create sustainable modern infrastructure or a strong welfare state. This economic model contributed to the crisis.

 

During the crisis, you united the Left and won the parliamentary elections in January 2015. Did you feel any fear at all?

 

No, I felt a huge historical responsibility in relation to the hope that had been created. But also joy. After all, I think most Greeks felt the same. For the first time, the government of the country was going to a left-wing force, which had in its history struggles that were quashed and drowned in blood. However, although SYRIZA was hegemonic on the Left, we did not unite the entire Left.

The Communist Party never wanted to participate in the government, nor even to open a broader dialogue. On the contrary, it fought a real battle against SYRIZA. Imagine how different things would be if this popular party had a similar attitude as the Communists in France, Spain or Portugal, who participated in progressive governments …

 

When did you realize that Europeans were at war with your government?

Even before we were elected, we knew it would not be easy! Greece had been subjected to disproportionate pressure from the dominant political forces in Europe. Some figures, such as Wolfgang Schäuble [the late Finance Minister of Angela Merkel] blamed Greece, perhaps to hide their own responsibilities for the economic course that Europe had taken. The EU did not go into crisis because of Greece, but because of its banks.

 

However, German public opinion was convinced that the problem was due to some lazy Greeks who lived above their means. This suited the conservative forces in Germany, as well as the IMF. For their part, social democratic forces were in an awkward position. Some Social Democrats expressed their support for us, saying that they supported us wholeheartedly, but they could not say it publicly because that would have amounted to putting their own political choices in question.


Did your attitude, for example the fact that you were not wearing a tie, not give the impression that you were trying to turn Brussels against you?


No, that was of secondary importance. Some of the dominant powers in Europe were absolutely unwilling to reach an honest compromise with the left-wing government of a country that was unable to pay its debt. And today we can see how differently Europe treats far-right governments compared to how it treated a left-wing government.

We, SYRIZA in Greece or Podemos in Spain, wanted to change Europe. We wanted to pursue a fairer economic and social policy, while the far-right wants to destroy it. This Keynesian-inspired policy, which gives fiscal space to states, was only implemented later during the pandemic crisis. If the policies we proposed then had been implemented, the effects of the debt crisis would have been significantly reduced, if not avoided. Some of our proposals have now been adopted.

Given this balance of forces in Europe, why did you take a decision for a referendum in June 2015?

 

Before the referendum, we sought an honest compromise, but It was impossible. The creditors demanded reforms and fiscal adjustments without offering either long-term financing or debt restructuring. In the government, SYRIZA had to meet the country’s fiscal obligations and carry out the reforms that the two previous governments had committed to, but failed to implement. The Samaras government had “passed down” to us twelve key reforms, such as the pension system, which were a prerequisite for Greece’s financing by its creditors. The creditors wanted us to implement these reforms, without committing to putting an end to the monitoring of Greece.

 

I, therefore, put in place a strategy aimed at dramatizing the crisis, in order to cause an effective shock. That was the strategy of the referendum. Between the huge wave of support and the prospect of seeing the cradle of democracy expelled from the Eurozone, the EU was faced with two political problems. Thanks to this pressure, we managed to agree with the Commission on a program that included difficult measures, for which we paid the political price, but also a three-year financing of the country, the prospect of debt restructuring and the management of the Hellenic Corporation of Assets and Participations in Greece [rather than Luxembourg]. In this way, we managed to maintain the cohesion of Europe, our participation in the Eurozone and, above all, we brought Greece back to growth while protecting the most economically disadvantaged parts of society.

 

European leaders such as François Hollande and Angela Merkel congratulate you in their memoirs. Have these congratulations arrived too late?

Our European partners showed a constructive attitude towards Greece when we returned to growth. Together with François Hollande, who supported me during the crisis, we created the Mediterranean EU Countries’ Summit (MED7). We concluded a series of bilateral agreements with France, to strengthen the Greek economy by attracting investors. Together with Angela Merkel, we dealt with the refugee crisis.

 

Congratulations have been made public for a long time… But public opinion has been shaped by those forces that created a political front against SYRIZA. History is written by the victors. But who brought Greece into the crisis and who got it out? That is a question whose answer is indisputable.

 

Nevertheless, SYRIZA loses the elections of 2019 and 2023…

Yes, but it retains 32% of the vote in 2019. In the years that followed, Mitsotakis’ government benefited from the results of the policies carried out by the SYRIZA government and from the billions it received during the pandemic. However, this government has resorted to practices that call into question democracy and the rule of law. And it created a dynamic front against SYRIZA. In 2023, when we received 18%, the electoral loss was more serious. Despite this, SYRIZA scored better than the rest of the Left in Europe – even than the Social Democrats in several countries.

 

Therefore, we must not only look at the development of the Greek Left, but the development of Europe, as a whole, as well – where the Left and progressive and democratic forces have taken a big step backwards. We are witnessing a conservative turn in history. An anti-systemic right-wing current is sweeping the world, as evidenced by the election of Trump and the rise of Le Pen. The traditional right, for its part, adopts far-right rhetoric, especially on critical issues such as migration.

 

How do you see the development of Europe?

Amid geopolitical instability, it is incapable of establishing its geostrategic autonomy in relation to the United States. It is experiencing challenges, both economic and political, such as Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. But there can be no prospect of peace, security and stability in Europe if Russia is excluded from dialogue.  European industry is caught between China and the United States which wants to impose higher tariffs. We are living in a dystopic period. For example: the President of the United States expresses his desire to invade Canada or Greenland, but no one reacts! Everyone reacted, and rightly so, when Putin entered Ukraine…

A very difficult future lies ahead of us. In this period of widespread insecurity, wars and the transformation of democracy, authoritarian regimes and hardline leaders are re-emerging. Their impact on the world and on Europe itself will be disastrous. The Left must learn from history. In 2015, in Greece, it won by mobilizing the middle and poorer economic strata around a liberating, social vision. In the face of fear, it must send a dynamic message based on the values of equality, freedom and justice. And that is exactly what I am trying to promote through the Institute that I have founded.

 

by Fabien Perrier

Photo: Max Gyxelinck/Liberation