The Alternate Minister of National Defence, Fotis Kouvelis, in an interview given to “TA NEA” newspaper (30/06/2018) with the journalist, Christos Tsigouris, stated the following:
Minister, can the Government bear the political cost of the agreement with the FYROM or this, aggregated with the cost from the policy of fiscal discipline, is going to lead to electoral defeat?
The government does not take political initiatives and decisions based on the “political cost”, but in line with the best interest of the country and citizens. Over time, I am confident that citizens, who are worried about the agreement with pure and selfless patriotism, will realize that the government has done its national and patriotic duty in full. As regards the second part of your question, I would like to underline that the recent Eurogroup’s decision paves ways for the implementation of social policies, for development with a progressive sign, for the fair redistribution of wealth and the gradual resumption of the acquired rights that working people have lost during the memorandum era. And this is credited to the current government.
The fact that MP Lazaridis became independent, however, further shrinks the parliamentary majority. How far can the government go and with how many members?
I estimate that the government will complete its term of office and will get to the end of the 4-year period.
How much are you troubled by the frequent occurrence of expressions of disapproval and jeering for the agreement?
I am troubled indeed, since they are organized by the “Chrysi Avgi” (“Golden Dawn”) political party, Nazi, fascist and extreme right-wing organizations that are trying to take advantage of genuine patriotic feelings governing a large share of citizens. I am also troubled by the fact that members of the New Democracy party participate in many of these events, given that the leadership of the main opposition party adopts an extreme right-wing agenda, in an effort – as it thinks – to capitalize political benefits. But it makes a huge mistake. Its words and actions do not serve the national interest, while at the same time it creates political conditions for jeopardizing its cohesion from its right side. It is going to pay its political opportunism. Citizens who now participate in such events are just a few. The majority of citizens comprehends the necessity of the agreement.
Had SYRIZA drawn a clear line from such behaviors against politicians during the period of protests in Syntagma square?
SYRIZA people participated in these mass demonstrations with a specific political precept and from a specific ideological starting point, contrary to the groups of “Indignants” (“Aganaktismenoi”), which had no political objectives at best and were a plaything of extreme right-wing groups in the worse. The set-off attempted by the main opposition party between the SYRIZA protests against the memoranda at that time and the extreme right-wing actions of today is both historically inaccurate and dangerous.
How do you regard Mitsotakis’ position that if he becomes the Prime Minister, he will not proceed to the ratification of the agreement, in case this is to be ratified during his period of government?
I believe that the agreement is to be ratified by the Parliament during the period of SYRIZA’s government, either by the end of 2018 or by the end of 2019. In case he becomes the Prime Minister and puts his announcement into practice, he will be consistent with the extreme right-wing of New Democracy that is his follower. However, he will be inconsistent with a centre-right liberal camp that was clearly positioned within the framework of a “national line”.
Do you believe that now is the time for the Government to take decisions on the relations between state and church?
You are raising a point that is a major concern for both sides for decades. I believe that over the years, this specific necessity has ripened for citizens and Church leadership and the country’s political world. All sides have now an excellent understanding of the discrete and at the same time important roles that both Church and the State have to play. All reforms should ensure the Church’s further independence, its spiritual role in the society and of course, its indisputable right to Autonomous Administration and its organizational structure. At the same time, however, it should be possible for the State – without coming up against obstacles – to freely regulate its relations with citizens, to ensure civil liberties and individual rights of citizens, regardless of their religion, as indeed provided for in the Greek Constitution.
Are you expecting any change in Turkey’s behavior at military level following Erdogan’s re-election? Perhaps the release of the two Greek officers?
Unfortunately no, for two important reasons. The first one has to do with the fact that the escalation of aggressive rhetoric and the tension in practice on behalf of Turkey against our country did not involve only the pre-election activity in our neighboring country. They were fully integrated in a strategic objective of Turkey. What is that? Rising questions – so it thinks – that do not exist with Greece and which have been already solved quite clearly by the International Treaties and the International Law, aiming at engaging our country in discussions on the Aegean, the Cyprus EEZ and on any other issue included in its expansionist pretensions. The second reason has to do with the fact that Erdogan cooperated throughout the previous period, but also before the elections, and will cooperate even after the elections with the most extreme nationalist part of Turkish policy.
