The latest intervention by Charis Doukas at the Delphi Economic Forum was not just another political statement.
It was a statement that confirms that the mayor of Athens has chosen to operate in a murky zone of political tactics, where strategy takes a back seat to personal ambition and communication gimmicks.
His reference to “inclusive progressive governance” – other than New Democracy – may sound appealing to an audience hungry for synthesis. But in practice, it functions as an evil political ploy: it leaves all possibilities open, without committing to anything. And most importantly, without answering the fundamental question: what is the real strategy of PASOK and who is formulating it
For here lies the crux of the matter. Duke is not speaking as a mere commentator on developments. He speaks as a top executive who is attempting, systematically, to prescribe his party’s political stamp before the president, NIkos Androulakis. This premature “initiative” is not a sign of boldness. It is evidence of political indiscipline – and, ultimately, political immaturity.
The most problematic, however, is not the timing. It is the content. When he leaves open the possibility of working with Alexis Tsipras and his political project, the Duke is not just doing a theoretical exercise. He is reiterating, in an indirect way, the scenario of PASOK’s transformation into a complementary player in a broader “progressive front” with its centre of gravity elsewhere. And this is not just a political choice. It is a choice that touches the very identity of the party.
Already, behind the scenes, there are growing voices accusing him of acting as a crutch’ for the Left. That he is attempting, step by step, to shift PASOK from its autonomous role to a position of secondary importance. And as much as these accusations may seem exaggerated, Dukas himself does little to refute them. Instead, with each new position he takes, he feeds them.
There is, however, a second reading – perhaps harsher, but no less realistic. The Duke is not driven by ideological consistency, but by political calculation. He strikes a balance, “treads” in more than one boat and deliberately leaves his mark unclear in order to keep all his personal perspectives open. Today “progressive governance”, tomorrow “autonomous path”, the day after “conditional partnerships”. A political pendulum swinging according to the audience.
This tactic may serve him well. But it weakens the party he is supposed to serve. For PASOK is not in a period of political comfort. It is at a critical juncture, where it is called upon to redefine its role in the political system. And at such moments, ambiguity is not an asset. It is a weakness.
At the same time, the following cannot be ignored: the mayor of Athens seems to treat his mayoral duties as a secondary priority. The city faces daily problems – from cleanliness to safety and infrastructure. But Duke chooses to invest political time and capital in national balances and post-election scenarios. As if he has already, politically, donned another suit.
This is not just a political mistake. It’s institutional understatement. The mayor of the capital is not a commentator on developments. He is a steward of responsibility. And when the latter yields to the former, the result is an image of administration operating on autopilot.
Finally, the problem with Harry Doukas is not that he takes sides. It’s that he doesn’t take a clear position. He hides behind generalities, balances between conflicting audiences and invests in a political “flexibility”that in practice translates into a lack of compass.
And this, at a time when the political scene demands clear lines, is not just a weakness. It is a choice. A choice that, if it continues, will not only damage his personal credibility. It will also hurt PASOK itself, which risks being transformed from a protagonist to an extra in a script written by others.
Harris Dukas is playing a dangerous game:he appears as the spokesman for a “progressive perspective”, but in practice he acts as a political opportunist with no clear line and no depth. It is not just that he confuses roles – it is that he uses them at will. Mayor when it suits him, would-be regulator of the centre-left when he smells opportunity.
If he thinks he can tread in two boats without cost, he is mistaken. History does not forgive those who treat parties with a track record like PASOK as a personal vehicle. Andsociety doesn’t trust politicians who change narratives faster than they change audiences.
At the end of the day, we won’t be judged by quotes in forums and TV panels.
.
