The situation in Greece focuses the attention of
anti-capitalist and revolutionaries of all countries. The events that take
place there will indeed have profound international implications. Implications that are economic and financial, implications
for the sovereign debt crisis and for the euro area. As well as the social and
political implications, on the ability of the labor movement and working
classes to resist and engage against an offensive. It is right that the
declaration of the EB of the Fourth International of May 24 was entitled
"The Future of European workers plays in Greece."
Syriza in Greece, the Left Front in France: the same strruggle?
Syriza, the Greek Coalition of the Radical Left, got 16.78% in the elections of
May 6 2012 and could get more than this in the forthcoming June 17 elections.
In an annuncement, also dated May 24, the Anti-capitalist Left (unitary current
for ecosocialism) - GA supported Syriza, thus:
"With their proposals centered on the redistribution of wealth, the repeal
of laws against workers, nationalization of banks, an audit of public debt and a
moratorium on debt payments, Syriza has convinced.
By responding to popular aspirations, the coalition has waged a battle for unity,
including by providing technical agreements with other leftwing anti-austerity
forces.
But Syriza is not and will not be simply an electoral force. Rooted in
the struggles, the coalition of the radical left immediately proposed (unions,
social movement forces and political parties that are not elected to/ sitting
in parliament) a front between the
"political" and "street" in order to impose anti-austerity policies. "
Then, rejecting the policies of both the KKE (the ultra-Stalinist Communist
Party of Greece ) more than those of Antarsya, the alliance of anti-capitalist left, the GA concludes by generalizing the example of Syriza: "Today, in Greece, as elesewhere,
we must be of such forces of the radical
left that create hope. We must contribute to the construction of a power
struggle with power and influence in the
central debates." The allusion to the Front Gauche/ Left Front and the
entrance to the GA plans to make future is clear.
It is a fact that these two political formationshave a lot in common: in their make-up
(a hegemonic alliance of reformist forces with other anti-liberal currents, but
also anti-capitalist or revolutionary forces), and their political program, or
their common membership in PGE, the European Left Party formed at the
initiative of most Communist parties and ex-Communist parties. There are
obvious similarities between the processes of electoral mobilization expressed around
Syriza and the Left Front.
We note that this phenomenon seems more general, considering the recent
electoral breakthrough of United Left in Spain (a well-established coalition,
organized around the Spanish Communist Party), that of Enhedslisten, the
Red-Green Alliance of Denmark, just as it is experiencing a marked shift
towards reformism and system integration (see the document published in
Viewpoint n ° 577-578 of October-November 2011 - the content of the title
belies the optimism of a) or, in England, the surprising victory of George
Galloway (Respect leader) in the Bradford by-election. Certainly, there are
also opposite process (cyclical or not, we will know after): setbacks for the
Left Bloc in Portugal at the most recent elections, and for the Left Party in
several regional elections in Germany.
We should nevertheless ask ourselves whether we are not witnessing in Europe a
phenomenon of a global character: the resurgence on a wide scale of a reformist
Left (ie a non-social-liberal Left), different from the (mainly social
democratic or Stalinist) Left that existed in the past, in that it is no longer
a project or socialist rhetoric and is marked by anti-globalization and
anti-liberal themes; that face the first crisis developments, a large sector of
the working class is turning to this new anti-liberal reformist left, rather
than to anti-capitalists, precisely because it offers institutional solutions
("Vote for us and we will arrange things"). This is obviously easier
to hear the anticapitalist discourse ("put your trust in your own strength
to change things, let us rally from below/ from the base").
However, there are also notable differences between Syriza and the Left Front.
On some subjects, such as the debt, Syriza defended different positions from
the Left Front, much more radical. (We
will see later that this radicalism is being challenged) than the coalition led
by Melenchon and French Communist Party. Certainly, as the situation faced by
the Greek people which is incomparably more dramatic, and perhaps the weight,
inside Syriza, of revolutionary currents such as DEA (Left Internationalist
Workers linked to the ISO in the USA ) reflects this.
But the main difference is at another level: SYRIZA, the the Greek Coalition of
the Radical Left is indeed in direct, full-frontal
opposition to PASOK, the social-liberal counterpart of the Parti Socialiste in
France of Hollande and Aubry. SYRIZA identifies PASOK with the right wing,
which it is, and as part of the `party system’. SYRIZA is obviously not the
same type of configuration as the Left Front, for which a first reuqirement
should be that a radical Left government
government would break with Hollande and the PS.
Nevertheless, this positioning of Syriza, qualitatively more independent than
the Left Front, is, however, not enough of a revolutionary and anti-capitalist
perspective for us to decide whether to move from solidarity with Syriza to a
position of political support, support for its policy. (The NPA must obviously express solidarity with Syriza in the face of
attacks it is suffering. For this, one must look a little closer its program
and project.
SYRIZA’s Programme
Language is a barrier, but a series of translations, provided to verify and
crosscheck the sources with some rigor, can be a good idea. Perhaps it is
better indeed speak of "the programmes" rather than "the"
program, as Syriza’s programme has turned out, in recent months and weeks, to
be an evolving process/ programme.
Syriza has not changed in its rejection of the two Memoranda (the austerity and
privatization imposed by the Troika), in a series of radical demands in defense
of employees, pensioners and the unemployed, public services, or in its demands
for tax reform and in respect of political corruption or in rejection/
opposition to anti-immigrant advocacy. Renationalisation, under workers’
control and popular/ people’s control and the renationalisation of "public enterprises of strategic
importance" that have been privatized since 2010 (when the first
Memorandum), also appears as constant demands/
policies.
But Syriza’s intentions are far more
blurred in regard to two issues that are absolutely central and decisive, since they are essential for,
setting the essential preconditions for , carrying out most of the measures and
policies just mentioned: these two
crucial policies are those relating to the the debt and to the banks.
Debt
The 10-point program of Syriza for the election on May 6 was the subject of a
summary in English, published on one of Syriza’s two official websites, left.gr. Debt was treated as follows:
"We call immediately for:
- A moratorium on servicing the debt;
- Negotiations for cancellation of debt [and not" of the debt "
, cf. after indent. Editor's note], with an allowance for social insurance
funds and protection for small savers. This objective will be pursued by all
available means, such as an audit control and a suspension of payments;
- Regulation of the remaining debt to include provisions economic
development and employment (...)"
But this position has changed since the elections. On May 8, before engaging in
consultations with other political formations, the "leader" of
Syriza, Alexis Tsipras, highlighted five points, which he presented as a basis for the formation of a
"left-wing government "[1]. In this program, there were only
"the creation of an international audit commission to investigate the
causes of the deficit in Greece, with a moratorium of debt service in
anticipation of the publication of results of the audit."
For the new elections due on June 17, Syriza published yet another
"government program". This text sees a further weakening on the issue
of the debt:
"Syriza denounces loans (treaties with the troika) to replace their
conditions abhorrent by others who will not call into question Greece’s national
sovereignty and the economic survival of our country. Conditions such as priority
in the repayment of loans or seizure of
the property of the State, granted to creditors by the Memorandum, will not be
accepted unconditionally and (...)
"The purpose of a leftist government in Greece will be to succeed in
establishing the necessary alliances, especially with the countries of southern
Europe, in organizing an International Congress and European sovereign debt, to
'find a common and viable solution to a problem which is a European problem.
The solution must be a common solution, shared, that is to say, the suppression
of organized debt without recourse to any of Memorandum of Understanding. As we
know, this is destructive of our societies.
"This global agreement could take the form of a moratorium on debt
settlement which could be related to
growth and employment for what would remain, taking as a model, decisions
concerning german debt in 1953 (...) "[2]
Given these developments, the observation can be made that the more Syriza progresses in terms of votes and voting intentions, the more moderate its program
becomes. It becomes more moderate, institutional (and is, furthermore,
systematically presented as compatible with the capitalist system and with the
European Union).
This relates to the following question.
Banks
On 18 and 19 February 2012, the Panhellenic Committee of Syriza adopted on this
subject an anti-capitalist program: "The financial system can and must
become public and be fundamentally reformed in a new system of banks, with an
administration and a democratic and transparent management with strong workers’
participation and control. This is what we
mean by the slogan: Nationalization-socialization of the banks. Depending on
their particular mission banks may belong to different public entities,
governmental and non-state actors, such as cooperatives, under the guarantee and protection of the state.
Their only concern will be to protect deposits and developments with social and
ecological criteria. Any speculative activity would be prohibited"[3].
However, in the English summary published before the election on May 6, there
is a fairly marked shift, the first shift. Under the chapter heading "A
reconstruction that is productive, social and environmental" left.gr no
longer mentions the
"nationalization / socialization of banks [again, of banks” and not "of
the "banks. Editor's note], and their integration into a public banking
system under the control of the company and workers, to serve development
goals. The scandalous bank recapitalization [ i.e. saving private banks with public
funds. Editor's note] must stop immediately. "
According to the site europegrece.wordpress.com, Syriza then offers the
"formation of a group of state intervention in the banking system, with the
National Bank, the Agricultural Bank and Post Bank, which will become publicly
controlled and become public property. Through this division, the new credit
policy, which encourages growth, supports SMEs, micro enterprises and the rural
economy, sectoral policies, encourages and strengthens the poorer "and
the" nationalization of each bank that is unable to meet its obligations
and serve the depositors and needs the support of the state. "The same
source added:" Note that some components of Syriza talk of nationalization
of all [emphasis added] banks "...
Finally, the program of government (the "five points") on May 8 by
Alexis Tsipras refers only to the very moderate and vague desire for a
"public control of the banking system, which today, despite the fact that
has received nearly 200 billion euros in cash and guarantees from public funds,
remains in the hands of leaders who made the banks bankrupt in the first place.
We demand that the Black Rock report be published immediately. Banks must be
instruments for economic development and strengthening of small and medium
enterprises. "
Listening to Syriza’s leaders
Beyond the programmatic policy texts, particularly electoral programmes, but
which may still vary, as is well known "are those who are willing to
believe it." We must listen to what Syriza leaders say publicly,
especially since they have acquired their new fame and find themselves under
the spotlight. Let's see some examples.
On debt - audit, moratorium, cancellation, payment ...
When asked "Syriza evokes the idea of debt cancellation: can we afford
it? "Rena Dourou MP, spkesperson for European affairs in Synaspismos (the
majority component of Syriza, Alexis Tsipras is also a member), says," we
exclude unilateral decisions: we want to negotiate with our partners to change
everything. We will do nothing that would justify sanctions "[4].
When asked "You also want to stop the payment of the debt? "Sofia
Sakorafa meets MP (consistent with the" five points "of 8 May
2012):" We ask for an international audit of the debt (...) Everything
should be audited because it was the Greeks who pay, the people who are accused of being lazy, corrupt, spending their
days dancing… while statistics show that we are the second country in Europe in
terms of hours worked "(La Vanguardia, Barcelona, May 17, translated by
A the Encontre May 19).
The moratorium, even on the payment of interest alone, would be rejected by
Syriza since a government of Syriza is
willing togive up any "unilateral" decision. The people of Greece and
workers find themselves deprived of even the freedom of inquiry into the
sovereign debt of countries, as this task would be placed in the hands of an
"international audit commission."
Also according Dourou Rena, this time by Mediapart, interviewed (in the May 25
article "In Greece, the momentum created by Syriza turns the world"),
states that "to revive the Greek economy, demand Syriza first time
European authorities: "Let us inject money into the economy for growth,
and then we will pay the debt - at least the legitimate part of the debt, which
will be determined by the audit. »»
That is now that the audit should be used to pay the debt ...?!
On the euro area and EU
"I do not think it would be good for Greece and for Europe if a country
such as Greece, exits the euro (...)
What is needed is a different recipe for a common European solution (...) We
want to first convince our European partners, to persuade European leaders that
they are following the wrong recipe. A recipe that must be changed and this
requires arduous political negotiations, political negotiations within the
European institutions (...) To sit around a table and talk about another
program is in everyone's interest. A program based on two pillars: growth and
social cohesion (...) Because I believe that althugh we have heavy
disagreements with Merkel, on this point
we agree: "If a country leaves the euro area, then markets will be hunting
the next, "then it will be the dissolution of the euro area and it will
not be good for the peoples of Europe" (Alexis Tsipras, interview with
CNBC U.S. television channel specializing in issues financial, May 8, 2012).
"We are a responsible political force, which does not yield to the
immediate slogans of the moment. To give you an example of how we, you
conceives European politics over the crisis, currently, our MEP Nikos Chountis
is currently contacting commissioners, important dignitaries of the union to
better conduct our policy"(Rena Dourou, Rue 89 interview, May 18).
We must discuss how to ask the question, the transitional approach and tactics
that may be necessary, especially since the Greeks are overwhelmingly for the
maintenance of their country into the euro and the EU. The simple proclamation
"out of the euro and the EU" does not meet this requirement. But what
is significant here - and deplorable - is that there is no questioning, let
alone a political break with the treaties and institutions of the European
Union. How in these circumstances can conducting any progressive politics be
considered? [5]
The "nationalization" of banks
"We believe we can overcome this crisis if banks could act as a lever for
development. There should be a public banking pole, a pole and the public
financial system should be under public scrutiny. We are not talking about a
nationalization plan, in which all banks would be held by one entity that
decides" (Alexis Tsipras, CNBC, interview cited).
This is clear: no public banking monopoly but a "public center" (also
dear to the Left Front) coexisting with private banks.
"Then, the nationalization of banks: from the moment a bank receives state
aid, the State must have a voice in its board of directors, at least until it
has paid his due" (Sofia Sakorafa, interview quoted in La Vanguardia).
If nationalization is limited to this, the bankers should be able to look ...
Financial markets
When asked "Do you think that financial markets will collapse as a result
of your statements? "Alexis Tsipras said," I think the markets will
stabilize when they realize that there is a lasting and viable solution
possible in Europe. For example, if Europe stopped persevering with solutions
that are not, and if it demonstrated that there is scope for radical change,
taking advantage of all the powers of the ECB to support the European countries
the brink of bankruptcy. I think that's what the market will stabilize soon. If
we do that support mechanisms such as the European Financial Stability Fund
(EFSF), it is as if we were using a small sailboat out for a gigantic cruise
ship, then the markets will get nervous and sometimes will fall, sometimes
start rising and this has nothing to do with the statements of some people, but
it will have to do with the relevance of the solutions to solve the problem. So
I think if you adopt our proposals, the markets will calm down and we will find
a social cohesion in Europe, something particularly important "(CNBC,
interview cited).
In sum, a moderate Keynesian position which ultimately would also welcome the
"markets" - or at least looks forward to and welcomes this.
On the state and relations with employers
"The pitfalls of bureaucracy, created forty years by the two parties in
power, PASOK (Socialists) and ND, often discourages young entrepreneurs. We
propose concrete measures to assist the development of SMEs by facilitating,
for example, access to EU funding programs or public and simplifying
procedures. What is needed is to restore confidence among young entrepreneurs
and the state, confidence that has been undermined by corruption. If the young
entrepreneur knows he does not have to pay bribes to wine every turn, this will
radically change the economic climate for healthy activities that create jobs
" (Rena Dourou, interview quoted in The world).
"A leftist government and the industrial needs of investors needs a
healthy economic environment. It needs meritocratic laws (...) Investments may
be positive in a meritocracy, with laws that go in this direction, not in a way
blighted by corruption and scheming" (Alexis Tsipras, on May 5 Greek
television channel NET).
Melenchon, who also wrote (in his presidential campaign) that his program was
in no way directed against "investors" (more bluntly: capital) and that they had nothing to fear,
can only appreciate such statements.
"We must therefore realize that the global crisis we are experiencing is
systemic, and there are two paths we can follow. One is the path followed by
the United States of America of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. The other is
that followed in Europe in the 1930s, the path of destruction, the rise of
fascism and war. Europe must not repeat this adventure. You can follow the path
taken by the United States in the 1930s, not the path followed by Merkel's
predecessors, which led Europe into a major disaster. Merkel would be a great
responsibility, if she does not cease
her stubbornness " (Alexis Tsipras, cited interview to CNBC).
There is no anti-capitalism here in what Syriza’s "real life" leaders say, out of
texts and discourse conventions. The only horizon of "change" being
proposed is the capitalism of the New Deal (something that is found also in
France, where this theme runs through the anti-liberal movement and has
recently given rise to the formation of the association "collective
Roosevelt 2012 "launched by Stιphane Hessel, Susan George, and ...
Larrouturou Rocard).
What attitude to anti-capitalists?
When we are outside of a process, and this is the case, regardless of the
passion we feel and the inspiration we take from Greek events, we must focus on
more strategic issues. Let the Greek anti-capitalist and revolutionary, only
able to judge, tactical issues (albeit very important) such as knowing whether
to advocate today from inside Syriza, as
one its components organized and maintaining its political independence, or, on
on the other hand, , in the case of organizations grouped in Antarsya, whether
to accept, for the elections of 17 June, a proposal to accede to an agreement with
Syriza [6].
However, as internationalist activists, we must have an appreciation of Syriza
and a policy towards Syriza.
We have seen, the majority and public policy of this coalition is neither
revolutionary nor anti-capitalist, but, instead, it is anti-liberal and
reformist. The NPA can not support this policy. This does not preclude
solidarity nor practical collaborationif possible (even though the "French
correspondent" of Syriza is clearly and logically, the Left Front). This
does not mean either that we would not recognize merits in Syriza, such as its refusal after May 6 to participate in a national unity
government.
There would be no sense in asking Syriza
to become what it is not, that is to say an anti-capitalist and revolutionary
training. However, Greek workers should expect or even require, Syriza to be
consistent in its own commitments, not
to retreat from the most progressive elements of its program and, if it does
enter into government, it has the means
to implement them. From this perspective, the recent declaration of its main
spokesman, as was reported earlier, represent setbacks including, probably,
from the expectations of Syriza’s own militants.
But the litmus tests are still to come - and they will come immediately if
Syriza finds itself after June 17 in a position
to form the government. In recent weeks, its leaders have consistently said
that while rejecting the memoranda imposed by the European Union, they understand
that Greece is a member of the latter
and of the euro area. In what is a step backwards from previous positions of
Syriza, they said they would seek an international negotiation on the debt of
Greece and would take no unilateral action.
So. Take note of these positions, even if they seem completely illusory. But if
the only response to this request by a Syriza
government is a rejection as seem likely
from all the responses from the
institutions and EU governments, from Schδuble at Fabius via Barroso (not to
mention Lagarde); then, if Greece was
then under the imminent threat of default and expulsion from the euro area ...
What will the leaders of Syriza do? The only alternatives will be either to
capitulate or to stage a showdown - thus
repudiating the debt, and exiting the euro.
"This is not the euro, it is the dictates of the" Troika "we
must fight today," states the declaration of the Fourth International on
May 24. From one point of view, it's true. But the euro is still an eminently
practical problem which is posed today. The stories, complacently conveyed by
the reformists, that the EU or the Euro could not expel a member state because
it would not be "legal", are children's stories. If it wants to be
substantial, even the limited perspective of his anti-liberal reformism,
training as Syriza must necessarily prepare now for such a scenario, even if it
is not one that it would prefer or seek. Get ready and say - except to adapt to the political
machinations of secret diplomacy. This, the revolutionaries and the Greek workers may require.
More generally, they can build on the recommendations of Leon Trotsky's
Transitional Programme in 1938, about the attitude to develop in relation to
the reformist forces "revolutionary pledge assistance" for Syriza
"against the bourgeoisie", the Greek and European troika, its agents
and financial markets. Without being "in its government" or
"bearing political responsibility for its activity." Knowing that if
a government led by Syriza "really broke" with the capitalist and
imperialist interests, such a "government of workers and peasants" (or
rather, in today’s conditions, better to say workers and people, ) "that
could expedite and facilitate "the anti-capitalist struggle, towards
socialism.
"The creation of such a government (...) is possible? Past experience
shows us (...) it is somewhat unlikely. However, can not categorically deny in
advance the theoretical possibility that, under the influence of a combination
of quite exceptional circumstances (war, defeat, financial crash, mass
revolutionary pressure, etc.)." Syriza leaders "can go further than
they want for themselves in the direction of breaking with the bourgeoisie."
And the Greek situation is undoubtedly the one that comes closest in Europe to such
exceptional circumstances.
Jean-Philippe Dives, 4 June 2012
[1] According to a report Ekhathimerini.com have been various translations
(consistent with minor exceptions), especially in English and Spanish at the
DSP Links Australian and French on the pro-Stalinist KKE (the Greek
CP)-international-solidarity pcf.over-blog.net.
These five points were especially subject to the two other leftist parties
represented in parliament following the elections on May 6: Democratic Left, a
social-liberal split Syriza, disagreed with them, the KKE refused to discuss
and even to meet with leadership of
Syriza, choosing to reject its proposal as an attempt to save the Greek
bourgeoisie and European and global imperialism ...
Note that in contrast, there is no record anywhere, either on that date or
another, the "emergency plan around the five points" that the
declaration of May 24 the Executive Board of the Fourth International assigns
" Greek radical left, including Syriza. " What is presented in the
said declaration is in any case much further left than the positions of Syriza.
[2] According to a translation of Panagiotis Grigoriou, available in one of his
posts (always interesting) published on his website dated May 29
