Remembering the last Greek government elected on a Bennite programme

As PASOK suffers the worst defeat in its history, the one thing it still has in common with Syriza is that it too was once elected on a Bennite programme. We reflect on that with the help of Tony Benn.

Last night’s sweeping victory for Syriza is the first election of a genuinely radical Left government in the European Union (though you might argue the Socialist/ Communist government François Mitterand appointed in 1981 also had a radical economic programme). The importance of Syriza’s victory in challenging austerity in Europe is tremendous and across Europe we will all be affected by its success or otherwise in meeting that challenge. 

It is important therefore that speculation about the relative strengths and weaknesses of the various factions within Syriza, is not allowed to party’s unity of purpose, nor the unity of the solidarity movement across Europe and beyond. There will be differences of view. The struggle is just beginning and decisions will be difficult. Some decisions will be controversial – like the decision to form a coalition with the right-wing Independent Greeks (known by the Greek acronym ANEL) — its leader Kammenos is an anti-semite who recently said that “Jews in Greece do not pay their taxes“. However, it is possible to make a strong case for it as Kevin Ovenden does here.

Nevertheless, I can’t help remembering how similarly enthusiastic I was about the election of PASOK back in 1981 on what also looked remarkably like a Bennite programme — withdrawal from the Common Market and NATO, state intervention in the economy and more. Then as now there was concern about how the international elite would react, and, in some quarters, about how strong was the resolve of its leadership. The story of PASOK ended in colossal disappointment and what could be its final rejection by the electorate in this election, but history does not need to repeat itself. Alexis Tsipras is certainly not the grotesque mediocrity that was Louis-Napoléon.

The situations are very different though PASOK was elected in the aftermath of the great crisis of capitalism prior to the one with whose fallout we are still living. Many of the fears are of course similar, Tony Benn had met the PASOK leader, Andreas Papandreou, in November 1980, though he had been indirectly in touch with him for some time, and recorded it in his diary:

He said “The government really has no economic policy and has complete control of the media.” Papandreou opposes the Common Market and thought the Americans might try to undermine a PASOK government, either by a flight of capital or by a military coup…”

He and I struck up a rapport immediately.

In March 1982, six months after PASOK formed its first government, he visited Athens:

Although the army are prepared to go along with Papandreou because of the national interest which leads them to suspect the Turks and hence the Americans, they are still no doubt riddled with the same sort of sentiment as at the time of the Colonels, and are not prepared to have any Communists in the government. This guarantees that PASOK will remain a radical liberal government with socialist rhetoric (and no doubt some socialist aspirations). They are genuinely trying to liberalise the regime They sacked all the senior civil servants, they are changing some of the judges, they are bringing in political advisers. But they have a severe economic crisis and they haven’t really got an industrial base.

Benn records Papandreou discussing the problems of the black economy, tax evasion and corrupt commercial relationships, getting to grips with the civil service, the corruption of the police, and the anti-left hatred within the intelligence services, his continuing suspicions of NATO and attempts to rid Greece of US weapons although they were, he claimed “pretty old“. Benn, who had become disillusioned, was won over once again:

I was most impressed by Papandreou. When I first met him in 1980 I had great sympathy with him, and here was a left-wing Labour-type Government with all the right ideas about the Common Market and NATO and industrial development. (…)

When I got to Greece I had a fear that Papandreou was another Mário Soares , ie that he must have been at least tolerated or even promoted by the right-wing social democrats in order to see that the communists never got into any position in Greece. However, I have come to the conclusion that there was something much more radical going on there, and I came away from the discussions very much encouraged.

Benn concluded that Papandreou had “considerable talent and ability” and his government was trying to do its best, though he regretted that it “consists mainly of intellectuals” faced with the challenger of “governing a rural society with ill-developed industry” dependent on tourism.

Although Papandreou abandoned the more radical elements of his programme fairly quickly, it took some time for him to lose popularity – until the late 1980s in fact, and his sone George managed to win a resounding victory only just over 5 years ago. Worst of all was PASOK’s descent into clientalism which is why the democratisation of Greek society and the ending of corruption is such an important facet of Syriza’s programme.