The Nikos Androulakis imposes party discipline, but statements by executives about collaborations rekindle questions in PASOK.
At a time when polls are predicted, the return of Alexis Tsipras is rearranging the imbalances on the centre-left and PASOK is urgently seeking political recovery, Nikos Androulakis chose to send a stern message to the inside of his party. In response to Charis Doukas‘s recent interventions on post-election partnerships, the PASOK president made it clear that anyone who publicly contradicts the party line cannot remain a member of the party. At the same time, he attempted to separate PASOK from both New Democracy and Alexis Tsipras’ Greek Left Coalition, projecting the image of an autonomous and institutionally organized political entity. But the problem is that the more strongly it attempts to impose a unified line, the more the more the contradictions and different voices within the party are revealed.
And so, the debate no longer revolves around PASOK’s programme or the alternative proposal for governance it promises. It revolves around who ultimately expresses the party line and who doesn’t.
Deviations are forbidden, contradictions are allowed
Androulakis’ stern warning to anyone who publicly questions the party line could be seen as a message of fierceness. Yet it raises a new question: what exactly is the line when top members of the same party are sending out different messages within hours? On the one hand, PASOK’s president appears adamant on the autonomous course and leaves clear barbs to those who open discussions about partnerships. On the other hand, Nikos Papandreou publicly states that after the first Sunday everything must be discussed. Is this a personal opinion or a more realistic reflection of what many within Harilaou Trikoupis think?
At the same time, Alexis Tsipras’ attack on the ELAS seems more defensive than offensive. When Androulakis feels the need to stress that PASOK is a “normal party” and not an “IX party”, he is in fact indirectly admitting that the former prime minister’s presence is already affecting the balance in the field. And the more the debate revolves around Tsipras, the harder it becomes for PASOK to impose its own agenda. The ELAS is facing the same problem, which is still searching for a new political narrative without being able to escape from the burden of SYRIZA’s government.
The result is a picture of generalized embarrassment in the centre-left. Androulakis appears to be threatening to threaten deletions to impose discipline, but is unable to prevent public differentiation. Tsipras attempts to present a new political beginning, but still carries the contradictions of the old one. And as the two sides compete over who will dominate the same political space, the impression is reinforced that their main concern is not how to govern the country, but who will manage to survive politically from the other.
