Kyriakos Mitsotakis’ skills and luck
Kyriakos Mitsotakis proved to be the right man at the right time when he was elected to lead New Democracy in 2016. The party needed someone who knew the mechanisms of politics from an early age and, at the same time, was seen as an outsider, a technocrat who could deal with the populism of the SYRIZA-Independent Greeks government. The same applied a few years later when, in 2019, he was elected to govern a country whose citizens had had their fill of easy promises and were looking for stability and growth. Since then, Mitsotakis has governed with skill and determination. He has proved also to possess something as important as skill: luck.
His father, Konstantinos, was famously unlucky. His greatest misfortune was that throughout his political career he was up against Andreas Papandreou, the legendary founder of the populist PASOK party. Kyriakos has Alexis Tsipras as his opponent, a rival incapable of realizing that the policy of constant complaint no longer seduces the masses. Even after the May 21 election he remained unaware that endless attacks on Mitsotakis and hopeless doomsaying were wearing down his own support, not his rival’s.
Mitsotakis’ abilities and luck were also evident in a series of crises which could have undermined his term. The tension with Turkey – first on the Evros River border, later in the Eastern Mediterranean – along with imported problems such as the pandemic and high prices, provided the prime minister with an opportunity to show his and his aides’ capabilities. When mistakes and problems arose (such as the wiretapping scandal, the Tempe train crash, pushbacks etc) most citizens appeared to weigh them against the government’s achievements and, though they considered them serious, did not want to jeopardize the stability that Mitsotakis had made the cornerstone of his policy. Furthermore, Mitsotakis was lucky in that the pandemic, high prices, energy problems and the war in Ukraine all led to a change of EU policy, allowing member-states to distribute huge amounts of money to support their economies and citizens. Our technocrat prime minister was able to spread money around without being labeled a populist.
Despite Mitsotakis being in a strong position, he will have to manage the difficulties that will arise from the fragmentation of the political scene
Mitsotakis was also lucky that the trap that Tsipras set for him – elections with a simple proportional electoral system – backfired on SYRIZA’s leader. The inability of any party to form a government after the May election led to new elections under the “reinforced representation” system that had been used for all but two elections since 1951. In 1989 and 1990, elections were held under a system devised by Papandreou’s government to make it difficult for Konstantinos Mitsotakis and New Democracy to win an outright majority. The ploy worked partially, as the elder Mitsotakis was forced to fight two elections and then govern with a one-seat majority for three years, falling after the defection of a member of Parliament.
Whereas in May the simple proportional system resulted in a five-party Parliament and no government, Sunday’s election under the reinforced representation system (which grants the winner bonus seats and a comfortable margin) resulted in a one-party government and a total of eight parties in Parliament. One can only wonder what would have happened if none of the parties had enough votes to form a government. The larger two or three would have had to overcome their loathing of each other and cooperate, or they would each try to persuade smaller, extremist parties to join them in a coalition. Today we may say that we were spared the scenario where some tiny, extreme party would determine government policy. But, despite Mitsotakis being in a strong position, he will have to manage the difficulties that will arise from the fragmentation of the political scene, the battles for influence on the left of his government and the dynamic rise of the zealots of the self-proclaimed “national” parties to its right.
We are entering a new phase in politics. A strong government without a credible opposition against it will encourage smaller parties to show ever greater demands for attention. The government will be forced to defend itself on several fronts at once. From its left, it will be criticized for “suppression” and for being the “hard right” that the leftist parties and anti-establishment groups need to justify their failures. From its right, it will be accused of caving to the leftists and to the “New Order,” which features so vividly in the fantasies of those who think they are defending the nation like the Spartans at Thermopylae. The rational Mitsotakis and his government will be navigating a sea of chaos, prejudice and special interests. And no interests are more special than those acquired by any kind of group. Mitsotakis will be up against not only the almost 60 percent that did not vote for his party on Sunday, but also many of those who did not vote at all. He will also be aware that he will probably anger his own supporters when their own interests and convictions are affected. The general political fermentation will exert a strong pull on disaffected ND voters, something that could limit Mitsotakis’ options when he seeks to apply difficult reforms or engage in delicate diplomacy.
So soon after his electoral triumph, it may seem absurd to wonder whether the greatest danger that Mitsotakis faces is his so-called “omnipotence.” But the lack of a strong rival will free up all that is absurd in our politics and society. If a capable rival does not arise soon, Mitsotakis himself should seek new allies and demand greater checks from institutions and the press. He will need a lot of skill to defend himself from the consequences of the luck which has helped him so well, so far, in his ambition to shape a new Greece.
