George Papandreou, the quiet leadership contender
During the 1980s, even the most experienced PASOK cadres would have laughed at the idea that one day George Papandreou would be a favorite in the party leadership stakes. It is a tragic irony that the death of his father, Andreas Papandreou, in 1996 served as a political springboard for Papandreou’s political career. Although he had never been, nor had he ever pretended to be, a political extension of his father, he inherited the Papandreou political legacy in an imperceptible but very effective manner. Endowed with the dynastic aura, within a very short time «Giorgakis» has acquired the stature of a major political player in the eyes of society. He was no longer the prince, but the heir. Until then public opinion had underestimated him; after the death of Andreas, they overestimated him. The current foreign minister has never made a secret of his intention to run for party leader when the time comes. However, until the next elections he is determined to avoid anything that might be interpreted even indirectly as an attempt to replace Costas Simitis. He is not being cautious simply because he wants the blessing of the current prime minister, but because he wants to be seen as the person who will keep PASOK united and put an end to divisions within the party. In other words, Papandreou wants to metamorphose the «reformists» and. «hardliners» into a party establishment and dissenting faction. PASOK deputies insecure The mood is anything but upbeat within PASOK’s parliamentary group. The threat of electoral defeat has produced a great deal of insecurity, as more than half would stand to lose their seats. Traditional groups have been fractured and each deputy is now motivated solely by personal survival. That is why they are turning toward the potential leader who appears most capable of averting electoral defeat, or at the very least, containing its magnitude. That is precisely the reason Costas Simitis was elected leader in 1996. The majority were not attracted by his «reformist» platform, but saw it had been well received outside the party and therefore would improve PASOK’s image, giving it new force and therefore making an electoral victory more likely. In other words, society determined the party organizations’ vote. George Papandreou will be fighting for the succession not only with his name on his side, but his goal of reuniting the party. According to his associates, this re-unification will not be achieved on the basis of agreements with party barons, but by setting up a majority force. The foreign minister in recent years has been quietly setting himself up as a favorite, prompting many undecideds to turn to him as the person most likely to get to the top. His supporters Recently, dozens of parliamentary deputies have been meeting with Papandreou, but it is his «chief of staff,» Thanassis Tsouras, who has most contact with cadres. It is Tsouras who has been weaving the political web within PASOK and who, when the time is right, will be the backbone of Papandreou’s campaign for the leadership. The greatest obstacle will be the widespread reservations and even disagreement over his policy on Greek-Turkish relations among deputies such as his father’s old supporters who decided to support the son’s candidacy, chiefly due to the efforts of Antonis Livanis. Most of these deputies, such as Karolos Papoulias, Yiannis Kapsis, Stelios Papathemelis, Panayiotis Kritikos and Sifis Valyrakis, agree that Papandreou is the most appropriate person to reunite PASOK but have serious objections to his Greek-Turkish policy. Papandreou has privately assured them that he would not make any concessions to Ankara and that his actions are part of a strategy that is flexible but by no means compliant. These assurances have somewhat eased their concerns, but they are still ambivalent with regard to the foreign minister. Papandreou’s «open arms» policy regarding Turkey is his Achilles heel. The fact that he has reduced tension in bilateral relations and achieved a relative calm in the Aegean has been a major factor in gaining people’s acceptance of his policies. Although his popularity is chiefly due to other factors, his policy toward Turkey could be an obstacle to his ambition of leading the party. Papandreou himself is hardly unaware of what is clearly at risk. His close associates and political supporters are constantly drawing his attention to it, advising him to distance himself, or at least not to commit himself in such absolute terms to a particular course of action which, over time, could become much more difficult and might even lead to a stalemate. However, Papandreou seems determined to stay on his current course, as he considers Greek-Turkish rapprochement his own «personal wager with history.» He believes that if things do not work out, he will avoid the political cost by declaring that he did his utmost to achieve the goal of rapprochement, but was defeated by Ankara’s negative stance. The truth, of course, is that he is trapped on slippery ground and cannot control the direction events will take. Papandreou’s impressive rise in popularity has of course worried Prime Minister Costas Simitis. Until recently, the prime minister has stuck to the argument that the electoral victory was a result of his own political stature and that he is the only possible choice for leader. But the fact that both society and the party see the foreign minister as an alternative solution, and in fact believe that under his leadership PASOK can win more votes, is a source of great concern to Simitis. That is why the prime minister’s associates never miss an opportunity to undermine Papandreou, even though they do not disagree with him on ideological grounds. The crucial issue is the manner in which Simitis will leave the party leadership. If PASOK is defeated in the October local elections, it is highly likely that some deputies will raise the issue of the leadership, even thought they have no replacement at the ready. Papandreou is not willing to be drawn into a battle with the prime minister, nor are his rivals, Evangelos Venizelos and Costas Laliotis, both of whom believe it would be better to enter the fray after PASOK loses power, not before. Meanwhile, the foreign minister is planning to deflect criticism that he has systematically avoided taking a stand on controversial problems by gradually making public his views on all major issues. At the same time, he will be continuing to push for a nationwide conference, scheduled for next June, in order to change the party charter, a decision taken at the last party congress. However, he is not planning to provoke a crisis if his rivals object. Laliotis agrees to a conference in July, but prefers that there should be no final decision. On the other hand, Michalis Neonakis has suggested postponing it until after the local elections, but is in favor of a final decision being taken. The issue may seem like a technicality, but in fact it will go a long way toward determining the succession process. The foreign minister wants to wage the battle where he has the greatest advantage, and that is why there are attempts to impede him.
