The Alternate Minister of National Defence, Panos Rigas, gave the following interviews, which were published with the “AVGI TIS KYRIAKIS” and “EPOHI” newspapers (23/06/2019):
INTERVIEW BY THE ALTERNATE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENCE, PANOS RIGAS, WITH THE “AVGI TIS KYRIAKIS” NEWSPAPER
1) Are you concerned by Turkish provocativeness? Do you think that an escalation or even a hot incident is possible?
This is not about having concerns or not. Turkish provocativeness is a permanent phenomenon with periodic escalations. Of course, this does not mean that we should lower our guard. We are following the developments with composure and resolve, we activate the arsenal provided by our country’s political and diplomatic capital and, at the same time, without escalating and militarising the tension, we maintain and enhance the readiness of our Armed Forces so that their deterrent role is visible and effective. No one can exclude the possibility of escalation, however something like this would not be reasonable. Turkey, who is the source of this provocativeness and violations, has nothing to gain from an escalation. Regarding the possibilities of a “hot” incident, we, on our part, create the conditions to remove this possibility.
2) It seems that, for the first time, the EU abandons its previous stance of verbal condemnations and considers sanctions…
We are well aware that the stance and reaction of the EU to Turkish provocativeness is a very complex matter, related to the strategic choices of European nations and large economic interests. But, at some point, the situation reaches the end of its tether. A very important step concerning the uniform stance of the EU has been taken and more will follow. Very important to this end is the seriousness of the Hellenic side and the highlighting during the past few years of the entire matrix of Turkish behaviours on our part. There is no more margin for misinterpretations. Europe can not be held hostage by the current Turkish leadership, since something like that would have long-term consequences for the European Union.
3) Do you think that your choices, the strengthening of the country’s international alliances, the Prespes Agreement, and the Government’s broader geopolitical choices in the region, constitute a moral victory for you?
The results of the multifaceted and active foreign policy followed by the SYRIZA government constitute a total moral victory. The country regained its international reputation and came on par with its geostrategic position. Greece has been established as a factor of peace, stability, and mutual development in the broader Balkans and East Mediterranean region. None of that happened on its own; it took a lot of work during a deep economic crisis, which we dealt with, something that for others would be a factor of introversion. We disregarded the short-term political cost, as in the case of the Prespes Agreement, giving precedence to long-term national interests. We overcame the fixed view that strategic alliances can be based on military cooperation with a single player; thus, we opened up new perspectives for cooperation in many other areas, as was the case with the US, China, and even Russia, where relations were realigned based on mutual benefit and respect.
4) New Democracy and a series of media outlets directly or indirectly accuse you of pre-election charades on the occasion of the meeting of the Governmental Council on Foreign Policy and National Defence and of dramatising the situation…
I’m afraid New Democracy and its followers have been blinded by their ambition for power and have committed a series of political faux pas. They place national interests upon the altar of petty pre-election interests, and in a quite irresponsible manner, for that matter. I urge them to rise to the occasion. Not everything can be sacrificed for petty politics. It is truly difficult to follow their reasoning. What does New Democracy want from the government? To not care for what is happening in the East Mediterranean, to not ask the European Union and the international community to take a stance against Turkish provocations, to not support the Republic of Cyprus? I repeat, they must rise to the occasion.
5) Only 2 more weeks to the critical election of 7 July. Do you think that your distance from New Democracy is reduced? From your tours and your contacts with people, do you think that SYRIZA can win back the citizens who abstained or voted otherwise in the European Parliament election?
The election of 7 July is different from the European Parliament election. We did take the message into consideration, quite seriously in fact. Beyond that, the stakes of the national election are very specific: will we continue on the path of recovery of society or will we go back, led by those who brought disaster upon us? The pre-election outreach and contact with society shows that the real dilemmas have reached large social groups. SYRIZA can win the trust of the people who trusted it in the first place, they are its people. Their pain is our pain, their dissatisfaction is our dissatisfaction, our self-criticism.
6) A significant demographic loss for SYRIZA at the European Parliament election was young people. A group for which, from your position at the ministry, you have proceeded to a series of beneficial regulations with regard to military service. What are they? What options are there available for further improvement?
I wouldn’t call it a loss. Young people have their own way of thinking and reacting. Their stance is reasonable, what we must examine is our stance, our behaviour, our priorities. Especially at the Ministry of National Defence, we made specific and targeted efforts. I am talking about the reduced service for all children of families with three or more children, the establishment of financial and social criteria for enlisted soldier reassignments, the regulations on alternative service, the arrangements for the new generation of draft evaders, who are young people who left Greece during the crisis, so that they can return to fulfil their military service obligation without consequences. We also arranged for an increase of enlisted soldiers‘ monthly pay from €8 to €30. At the same time, there were various innovations regarding military service within the framework of the reorganization of the Armed Forces, such as the abolition of Newly–Recruited Soldier Training Centres in the Army and the enlistment thereof straight in combat units. There is a lot more to be done for the further upgrade of military service.
INTERVIEW BY THE ALTERNATE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENCE, PANOS RIGAS, WITH THE “EPOHI” NEWSPAPER
1. The government’s opponents accuse it of presenting a programme, in light of the unfavourable election results, which is fragmentary or copied from the programmes of KINAL and New Democracy. How do you respond to this criticism?
Those who bled and impoverished Greek society during the 2010-2014 period now re-emerge as its protectors and aspiring saviours. The Prime Minister and the competent Ministers presented an overall government programme until 2023, with the country now out of the MoU regime. It is a fully costed and documented plan, in line with the country’s fiscal obligations, oriented to the needs of the great majority of society. Our programme does not include commitments for public sector hiring following the 1:5 rule, no Pinochet-style insurance system, where those who can pay have insurance, while the rest are left out. On the contrary, it includes a provision for further increases of the minimum salary by 7.5% in 2020 and 7.5% in 2021, for 10,000 hires in Health and 15,000 in Education. The copying allegation is completely groundless, with New Democracy we are worlds apart.
2. Why is the position of the SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance coalition that it is possible to reverse the European Parliament election result convincing?
That is not our position. On the morning of 7 July, the ballot boxes will be empty and what may be reversed is the feeling of certainty of our political opponents that their win is guaranteed. We believe in victory, because we believe in our programme and our ideas. As long as the political debate is between the different political viewpoints, of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance and New Democracy, we will be closer to victory. That is our goal until the election, to present our programme to the people and highlight our different political and ideological viewpoint from New Democracy regarding the future of Greek society.
3. What are the main stakes of this election, i.e. of the next four years, in your opinion?
In two words, our country‘s future. Each day, the extent of the difference between the two political plans, of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance on one hand and New Democracy and its coalition of the willing on the other hand, is understood. What we as society must ask ourselves in this election is how we will proceed during the next four years: all together, for the common good, for sustainable progress whose benefits are fairly distributed to all, or each for himself on the path of economic competition, where personal gain will be achieved through the violation of social rights?
4. Even after the resignation of Venizelos, KINAL’s line did not change from inconsistencies like “we are a responsible force of national consensus” which will “constitute a powerful counterweight both to conservative policies and irresponsible populism”. In your opinion, how should SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance deal with this biased ambiguity?
KINAL’s political language and tactics are brimming with such inconsistencies. KINAL has yet to come to terms with the loss of its hegemony to the progressive space, a loss that was caused by its tight embrace with neoliberalism and its shift to more conservative positions, at the same time as the rise of SYRIZA. Its tactics are opportunist and petty political. On one hand, it seeks tactics to save itself politically, voice a discernible political language and, on the other hand, its leadership, addicted to government power, seeks ways to reclaim it. This results in the demonisation of SYRIZA. This choice is extremely opportunist and at the expense of the progressive space as a whole. It seems to deny its origins and disregard the developments taking place in Europe, where, during the past few years, a front of progressive forces has started to be formed against Neoliberalism, the disruptive anti–social policies, and the far right. KINAL must reflect on the extent of its petty political and dead–end tactics and finally pick a side at this historical moment.
5. You will be a candidate in a constituency where the Left has always laid a particular focus and where it saw its power drop at the European Parliament election. Where do you think emphasis should be laid for the new battle, how do you think you can contribute, since you are an official who knows both the party and the constituency well?
B2 West Constituency of Athens is one of the constituencies where, despite the losses, SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance stayed first at the European Parliament election. It is the “refrigeration technician area”, according to Kyriakos Mitsotakis. We, who know it better, know that it is rich in history and social struggles and in people of labour, science, culture, and sports. Here live many fighters of everyday life who, compared to others from various areas of Attica, started with less, but fought and won in their work, in their business, in their art, in their sport. We must address each and every one of these citizens, the men and women of the West suburbs, accept our mistakes, and explain why SYRIZA’s programme is still the political choice for a better future. I am confident, given the meetings I had and the visits I made, however we still have a lot of work to do in the two weeks remaining.
6. How do you comment on the statements of New Democracy and KINAL about the Greek – Turkish tension and especially the meeting of the Governmental Council on Foreign Policy and National Defence?
Unfortunately, the anti-SYRIZA fury of our political opponents is so great that it has repeatedly led them to views that place petty political interests above national interest, a stance they kept e.g. with the Prespes Agreement. In this case, we were surprised to listen to Mr. Mitsotakis himself, referring to the meeting of the Governmental Council on Foreign Policy and National Defence, talk about an “overreaction” of the Greek Government. Turkish provocativeness is rising, the matter now becomes part of the agenda of European institutions in the most formal way, for the first time international sanctions are expected to be imposed on Turkey and New Democracy accuses the Greek Government of “dramatisation”. I think even irresponsibility has its limits.
7. Of course, the Ministry of National Defence is not responsible for foreign policy. However, with regard to the tension created by Turkey in its relations with Greece, and given its gravity, it would be very interesting if you could give us your approach and your views on this matter.
The Ministry of National Defence is not responsible for foreign policy, however it is part of its exercise, as defined by the competent government institutions and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Characteristic achievements of the multidimensional Greek foreign policy during the past years are the expansion of existing alliances and the development of new ones, also in new areas of interest, where he had common interests. The goal of our diplomatic efforts is the protection of national interests, while closely observing the provisions of International Law.
The expansion of our diplomatic capital during the past years, beyond being a common view, is also an annoying situation for our neighbours, who respond to our successes with tension and provocativeness. During the economic crisis, our country’s Armed Forces managed not to lose their deterrent strength, on the contrary; and this is mainly due to their personnel.
8. What is your experience from your tenure at the Ministry and what do you think were the most important interventions you made from your position? Were there any measures (and what were they) for enlisted soldiers as young people?
At the Ministry of National Defence, we made very specific and targeted efforts for social welfare, regarding young people and their military service obligations. I am talking about the reduced service for all children of families with three or more children, the establishment of financial and social criteria for enlisted soldier reassignments, the regulations on alternative service, the arrangements for the new generation of draft evaders, who are young people who left Greece during the crisis, so that they can return to fulfil their military service obligation without consequences. We also arranged for an increase of enlisted soldiers’ monthly pay from €8 to €30. At the same time, there were various innovations regarding military service within the framework of the reorganization of the Armed Forces, such as the abolition of Newly-Recruited Soldier Training Centres in the Army and the enlistment thereof straight in combat units. There is a lot more to be done for the further upgrade of military service, but I think we took some important steps.
