A new era in Greece

It didn’t happen that way.

These elections initiated three important developments in Greece:

1. The younger generation came to power. For the first time in history, two leaders of the top two parties in Greece are between 45 to 50 years of age. A generation that did not see World War II or the Greek Civil War is in charge.

This is a very important development for Greece. We will watch them competing with each other in the future.

2. Economy-unemployment-corruption will become a priority for the first time, and reforms that were delayed for so long will most probably be implemented.

It was plainly obvious that people were more interested in the money in their pockets than foreign policy objectives.

3. Greece’s Turkey and Cyprus policies will not change. These issues, which had always been election issues, will no longer be taboo.

In 2000, PASOK won the national elections by a 1 percent (82,000-vote) margin. This is the revenge of the New Democracy Party (NDP).

NDP leader Costas Karamanlis passed an easy test; now comes the real trial. In other words, people want good governance and fulfilled expectations.

A great change in the Greeks
I couldn’t believe what transpired in the Greek elections.

I remember past elections, and the gap between this one and those of the past is unbelievable.

In past elections, especially during grandfather Papandreou’s era, elections were usually based on anti-Turkish slogans.

Andreas Papandreou based his politics on hatred of the Turks. Turkey was portrayed as the source of all the evil that had befallen Greece. From forest fires to floods, there was only one source that was responsible, the Turks.

The worst of the evils was Turkey’s military intervention in Cyprus. Everything that happened before 1974 was forgotten, and their attitude seemed to be that the history of Cyprus started only after 1974.

As a result, the elections were based on the belief that whoever attacked the Turks more would get more votes.

This is what is strange about these elections.

In these elections, anti-Turkish sentiments were replaced by friendship with Turkey. The election was between those who argued that they would have better relations with Turkey, not between those who said they would make Turkey pay a higher price for what it had done.

Papandreou argued: "I established peace with Turkey. I am better equipped to develop it," while Karamanlis said: "My relations with the Turkish government are very good. I am the one who will better develop the relationship."

In this respect, the change in Greek society is very impressive. Old politicians and cheap politics have been replaced by new politicians and a new vision.

Another issue that surprised me was that at a time when the future of Cyprus was being negotiated, politicians did not use it as election material. The media was also disinterested in the Cyprus issue.

Even the Greeks are sick and tired of Cyprus. I say "even," because for Greek society, Cyprus is especially important. Even they want an end to the issue.

That’s not all. Greek politicians have also matured.

Karamanlis’s Cyprus jest
There was an incident many people told me about in Athens.

During the Cyprus negotiations in New York, then Prime Minister Costas Simiis and Foreign Minister Papandreou called Karamanlis before accepting Turkey’s proposal for U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to fill in the blanks on unresolved issues. They told him that they would accept this initiative in order to solve the Cyprus problem and admitted that this was a matter that the opposition would naturally use as an election issue. According to what people told me, when asked what he thought about it, Karamanlis said, "I won’t use Cyprus as an election issue."

Karamanlis really did not include the Cyprus issue in his election campaign. He did not accuse Papandreou of selling out the island.

We can only hope for similar maturity.