Chrysochoidis’s role in success
They say that success has many fathers, while failure is always an orphan. But this rule does not appear to apply to the breakup of the November 17 terrorist group – carried out at a pace reminiscent of action movies. Although it may be true that the positive developments of the last few days are the culmination of the collective efforts of a bevy of government and police officials, no unbiased observer can fail to acknowledge the decisive role played by Public Order Minister Michalis Chrysochoidis. Those involved in the affair know that the minister made it clear to his subordinates from the outset his intention to root out the cancer of terrorism once and for all and to bring all related investigations to a conclusion. This unwavering stance purged public order officials of longstanding – and often justified – fears that they might displease their political superiors if their investigations exceeded certain undefined limits. It was also Chrysochoidis who led initiatives to re-establish closer cooperation with French, British, US and other authorities who were in a position to offer valuable information and technical support to Greece. By doing this, he dispelled an inherited mentality of exaggerated mistrust. Also significant was his decision to seal the circle of those privy to the progress of investigations, allowing only those who were indispensable – and reliable – to remain within, in order to avoid the leaks of the past which would hamper the effectiveness of the operation. Finally, it is also worth noting that the professionalism of the police in this case was matched only by their respect for constitutionally protected freedoms – an approach which had not always existed under previous governments and which helped secure the acceptance of the broader public in this case. Since the end of the military dictatorship in Greece – perhaps even as far back as the end of the civil war – the Public Order Ministry had been a difficult, rather unpopular posting, as demonstrated by the failure of any of its leaders to attain a leading political role. Chrysochoidis’s aim to be the exception is not groundless. In an era of «TV democracy,» where it is the norm for politicians to invest in their image and in public relations, Chrysochoidis, relatively thrifty in words, preferred to invest in the more reliable and long-term currency of the political marker – his actions. In this way, he raised standards in politics, sending a message that resonated throughout the political spectrum.
