While Alexis Tsipras attempts to craft the profile of a mature leader, reality and current events themselves seem to highlight the contradictions in his strategy.

Which strategy straddles between selective self-criticism and outright denial of the darker aspects of his administration.

The recent documentary by Skai on the period of the economic crisis and the memoranda was the occasion to reignite a debate that many in Syriazas and in the Left would have liked to have closed for good. Alexis Tsipras’ refusal to take a stand or give an interview did not go unnoticed either.

Open fronts

For political observers, this silence has a special semantics, as it stands in stark contrast to his presence at a recent conference of the same media group, where the former prime minister appearedwilling to self-criticize for resounding blunders,such as the management of Novartis scandal and the television licensing fiasco.

This tactic of “a la carte” accounting creates the feeling of a politician who chooses to admit only what he believes has already been “burned” in the public consciousness in order to salvage any prestige for the major issues. But in the first half of 2015, the third memorandum and the Prespes Agreement remain businesses that are not closed by… abstaining from journalistic investigation.

When Tsipras feels that the political timing favours him, he appears as the renewer of the left who learns from his mistakes. But when the criticism becomes penetrating and touches on the structural failures of the 2015-2019 period, his rhetoric returns to the old, familiar routes, namely attacking journalists and researchers who dare to record the facts.

A particular chapter in this attempt to rewrite history is the Prespa Agreement, which the former prime minister presented as an act of national responsibility that raised the country’s standing internationally. However, the reality at home remains different, with the vast majority of citizens still seeing the agreement as damaging and as a retreat that hurt national sentiment that never received the popular legitimacy it demanded.

The fact that Alexis Tsipras, a politician who built his career on anti-memorandum fury,chooses to dub discontent populism as populism is at the very least exciting.

After all, his stance on the memos remains the biggest thorn in any attempt at a comeback. The transition from promises to tear up the memorandums to signing the third and toughest of them is a historic shift that cannot be washed away by communication gimmicks.

The SKAI documentary, as well as the various books and texts written about the period, highlight the amateurish negotiations, the internal conflicts and the cost that the Greek taxpayer was asked to pay.

Tsipras’ reaction to these accounts is usually disparaging. He rails against those who write the history of his administration, accusing them of bias, at the same time as he refuses to provide his own answers to the tough questions. Alexis Tsipras’ political survival has for years been based on his ability to manoeuvre.

But selective memory, like any self-criticism without a frank admission of mistakes, is bad advice for someone who aspires to return to the political scene in terms of seriousness. Thus his image remains politically incomplete and untrustworthy.

No accident

Observers point out that his refusal to participate in the documentary was not a random choice, but an attempt to avoid conflict with the image he has constructed for himself. An image that cannot stand the details of closed rooms in Brussels or the behind-the-scenes deliberations over the name of the neighbouring country.

The more the former prime minister chooses to attack media officials rather than respond to the substance of the criticism, the more the belief that his “transformation” is purely superficial will be reinforced. At the end of the day, history is not only written by the protagonists, but also by those who have the courage to investigate its shadows.

Memoranda and Prespes are now inscribed in the collective unconscious of Greeks,and no communication counterattack can change the fact that they remember very well the promises made and the reality that was finally imposed.

Silence may offer temporary safety, but historical crisis is a process that does not lend itself to silence. Alexis Tsipras seems to understand this, which is why nervousness in the face of journalistic scrutiny remains his most faithful companion.