Tourism Officials Must Learn That Less Is More

 

How much tourism is too much? There seem to be at least two different approaches. One is to invite tourists to your country to enjoy and respect what is on offer without changing your own traditions/values or risk damaging the environment  just to attract the mobs. The other approach is to attract the masses at any cost, regardless of the damage to those traditions and the very environment that makes your location attractive and unique in the first place.

Some popular destinations like Amsterdam and Venice are finally taking steps to limit the ravages of mass tourism. Amsterdam officials have gone so far as to ask tourists not to come there. Venice is levying heavy fines for bad tourist behaviour like littering, disrespecting monuments or – like two idiotic Australian tourists – taking power surfboards down the Grand Canal. Venice has fought a long battle to save its precious canals and ancient, fragile building foundations from the damage caused by enormous cruise ships that blot out the sun and dump thousands of tourists onto its narrow, twisting streets. Some of the beautiful, equally fragile Norwegian fiords have also been plagued with these cruise ships that can barely fit into narrow harbours. Fortunately the country is beginning to learn the value of just saying ‘No’ and is taking steps to limit that damage.

Tourism? Or Vandals sacking Rome -- again?

Other countries like Greece seem to have taken the attitude that there is no such thing as too many tourists munching over-priced souvlakis and cheese pies while slurping beers as they wander around some of the most precious monuments in the world. What should be moments of reflection in front of some of these monuments has turned into a cacophony of flip-flops slapping on the ancient marble, loud yells to have friends join them for yet another selfie in front of a statue, moans about the heat (didn’t anyone tell them about Athens in July), or comments about the lack of a loo in the Parthenon.

Athenian hotels now try to outdo themselves with roof-top bars blaring music (?) until dawn and making life unbearable not just for guests unfortunate enough to have rooms in the hotel but also for the hapless residents of the neighborhood who actually have to get up at a decent hour and go to work. But somehow those tax-paying residents don’t seem to count for much in the eyes of city officials. Perhaps the city will start offering them grants to leave the city in the summer and head to some remote part of the country. God forbid they should start telling tourists how to behave!

Yes, Greece has had a very difficult economy for the last several years and many people believe that mass tourism is the best solution for their difficulties. But these people fail to realize that this sort of tourism is rapidly destroying the very thing that makes places like Greece, with its beautiful sea, idyllic islands, and much-overlooked mountains so special.  

Take Mykonos -- essentially a rocky, barren island with very little water. When I first went there many years ago it was known as being sort of bohemian, attracting a lot of artists with modest talents and less money. Now it has been transformed into the party island of Greece, jammed with wannabe Eurotrash and over-priced bars that don’t open until midnight and produce ear-shattering noise that doesn’t stop until dawn. Inevitably the drug culture is never far behind. The harbour is filled with monster cruise ships waiting to disgorge unsuspecting passengers onto the overburdened island to wander around the narrow streets and buy authentic Made-in-China Greek trinkets and souvenirs. Smart passengers stay on board and order another gin-and-tonic in the comfort of an air conditioned bar. Maybe it’s not a bad idea to create an isolated spot like Mykonos – rather like the plague islands outside ancient Venice – and avoid infecting the rest of this beautiful country.

Not sure this what Odysseus had in mind

All these thoughts came to mind when my wife and I took a break from Greece and spent a delightful week in the Alsace region of France. The natural beauty – with hundreds (maybe thousands) of vineyards stretching from the lush green valley up to the foothills of the Vosges mountains – is stunning. These vines produce several delicious wines such as Riesling  and Gewürztraminer. Picturesque villages with rich history dot the area. Yes, the area is filled with tourists in August but because of the infrastructure and general attitude toward tourism in general it was not unbearable.

Beautiful Alsace

 The superb public transport system means you don’t really need a car. My wife likes nothing better than scouring local bus schedules and she quickly found frequent, inexpensive buses from Colmar to the beautiful surrounding villages. The city of Colmar also offers a free small bus service within the city limits. Restaurants and bars were full, but unlike Greece, they were not allowed to infringe on the local lifestyle. They closed at reasonable times (midnight or at the latest 1:30 am) and the noise was moderate. The overall attitude seemed to be ‘Come and enjoy what we have but don’t expect us to destroy our lifestyle or environment just to cater to bad behaviour. Take us as we are or don’t come.’ 

One wishes that Greek tourism officials would learn the lesson that less is often more. Do they really appreciate the beautiful and fragile ecosystem of their own country? Or do they think that chasing the last Euro from mass tourism is worth the destruction? Can they can develop the courage and, yes, the self-respect to discourage the worst of mass tourism that only drives away those people who really want to enjoy the culture and natural beauty of Greece? Overall tourist numbers may decline but the quality of the tourist experience – as well as the spending – will sharply increase without damaging the social or environmental fabric of the country.

 

Mediterranean Standoff Shows Little Sign Of Resolution

 

So far Greece has played a masterful hand against Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean standoff. It has collected an impressive list of allies against Turkish attempts to claim a larger slice of the maritime territory and has used this tension to build up its armed forces.

 

            It has also been extremely fortunate in its opponent. Turkish President Tayyip Erdoğan is extremely unpopular outside Turkey and has diplomatically isolated his country. I have found only one country, Azerbaijan, that half-heartedly supports Turkish claims over maritime sovereignty. He has not only alienated most of the European Union members but has also alienated the vast majority of Arab countries who are happy to align themselves with Greece. Erdogan was furious when the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain recognized Israel. But, as usual, he glosses over inconvenient facts. Turkey was one of the first countries to recognize Israel and still has several daily flights to Tel Aviv. He has always portrayed himself as the leader of the Muslim Middle East but those claims have now drifted into fantasy land.

 

            Even the loudly trumpeted maritime pact with the UN-recognized part of Libya remains stillborn. In order to become effective the pact had to be ratified by parliaments in both countries. The Turkish parliament quickly ratified it but so far the Libyan parliament has rejected it. Therefore that agreement has no legal standing and is just another baseless claim by Erdoğan.

 

            Beyond these various maritime agreements Erdoğan has other problems that limit his options. Turkey is bogged down with military adventures in Syria and Libya with no end in sight. Keeping a large part of its army in Syria and supporting mercenaries in Libya is an expensive exercise – one the country really cannot afford. After years of mismanagement the Turkish economy is in tatters and the currency keeps sinking to one record low after another. Unemployment is rising and inflation is running well above the Central Bank’s benchmark interest rate. Erdoğan has a pathological hatred of interest and rebuffs every attempt by the Central Bank to counter currency weakness by increasing interest rates. According to his logic the currency is not sinking because of his own mismanagement but because of machinations by the so-called interest rate lobby, the Free Masons, George Soros (he of the infamous anti-Turkish Jewish lobby), the Knights Templar and other assorted malign foreign forces.

 

            But beneath the bellicose language Turkey does have a point in all these discussions about maritime boundaries. The sad thing is that if the Turkish position were presented by someone other than Erdoğan people might actually pay attention and try to solve the problem intelligently. But no one is inclined to give the swaggering neighbourhood bully such consideration.

           

            The Greek position may be within the strict letter of the law but often seems unnecessarily provocative. When you look at a map of the Aegean there is a string of islands extending along the Turkish coast from Mytilene in the north all the way down to the tiny (12 square kilometres) island of Kastellorizo in the south. Then, of course, there’s Cyprus off Turkey’s southern coast. But that’s another long, complicated story. These islands enable Greece and Cyprus (at least the internationally-recognized part of the island) to claim sovereignty over a large part of the Aegean and much of the  eastern Mediterranean.

           

            Understandably these claims infuriate Turkey, which has a long coast line of its own stretching from the northern Aegean all the way around to the eastern edge of the Mediterranean, because it feels hemmed in and denied access to potential maritime riches by a chain of relatively small islands. The various laws and treaties governing maritime rights can fill at least one very large bookcase. Suffice it to say that Greece and Turkey have conflicting views on the application of these laws and treaties. Just one example – Greece has signed the United Nations Convention On The Law Of The Seas which states that Greece is entitled to an Exclusive Economic Zone around the islands. Turkey has not signed this convention and says that convention applies only to the countries that signed it.  In fact Turkey does not recognize a legal continental shelf and EEZ around the Greek islands. As far as Turkey is concerned the continental shelf should be measured from mainland Turkey and not the adjacent Greek islands.

 

            Beyond these migraine-inducing legal arguments there is the even more fundamental question about the size of the resources under the sea. While significant gas fields have been discovered in the indisputably Israeli and Egyptian zones there is serious question about resources near Cyprus. Exploration off Cyprus has so far yielded disappointing results. And nothing has yet been found in the Aegean. But let’s say a major field is discovered. What exactly do you do with it? Some people talk grandly about an undersea pipeline extending from the waters off Cyprus to Crete or Rhodes and then somehow to the Greek mainland and onto Italy. Such a pipeline is astronomically expensive and at today’s natural gas prices completely unrealistic. Ah, you say, send it to Cyprus where it will be converted into LNG (liquified natural gas) and sent on its way in ships. Too bad no such LNG facility exists on Cyprus. And it’s doubtful anyone would build one unless a major field is discovered and gas prices increase sharply.

 

            Looking at a map and ignoring politics for a minute the obvious solution is a pipeline through neighbouring Turkey, a country with multiple pipelines and only 40 miles from Cyprus. Logical? Perhaps. But this is the Aegean/Mediterranean region that has a much longer history of conflict than of logic and cooperation. One might hope for a breakthrough but that would require more statesmanship than is visible right now.

           

A Long Way Around But We Finally Made It

After a circuitous two-day trip we finally managed to escape from the travesty that has befallen Boris Johnson’s Britain and land in Greece. This involved a flight to Geneva then a train trip to Zurich and finally, the following morning, a flight to Athens. Arriving in Geneva one is reminded of something that seems to have escaped the ‘New’ Britain – efficiency. We caught a train directly from the Geneva airport for a comfortable scenic ride directly to the Zurich airport. Train officials were mortified that the train was 6 minutes late. They shouldn’t have worried. This small taste of efficiency was very welcome. British officials, on the other hand, seem to have lost the ability to be mortified by anything, let alone mere train delays. A delay of only 6 minutes would be cause for celebration throughout the country. One more thing, the check-in queue at Swiss Air in Zurich very early on Friday morning was extremely long. But there were more than 20  check-in counters and they were all manned. Consequently the queue moved quickly. The same story at security. Every position was manned and it took less than 3 minutes to clear security despite the crowds.

            Because our trip had originated in the UK we were tested for Covid-19 at the Athens airport. We had previously given our trace-and-track details and were allowed to continue our journey even though the results wouldn’t be ready until the next day.  Had we tested positive – we didn’t – we would have been notified to self-isolate for two weeks. Seemed like a reasonable approach – especially when compared to the ham-handed approach in the UK where there was no attempt at testing (let alone tracking) and arriving passengers were simply told to quarantine for two weeks. Now, when the UK is finally modifying that policy many countries aren’t sure they want British tourists because of the virus spikes in the country.

Track and trace? Promised by June, now delayed indefinitely.

            British governments weren’t always this incompetent. But now there’s a prime minister who acts as though he would be much happier as the master of ceremonies at some pub’s karaoke night rather than lead a serious country. That’s hard work and requires real knowledge of major issues. Much easier to use one’s natural glibness and focus on simple, short crowd pleasing slogans like ‘Get Brexit Done.’

Much more fun than Prime Minister's Question Time

            Even though Britain is starting to re-open the country faces many more serious challenges like a treaty with the European Union and a trade agreement with the United States. Both of these are problematic. If this wasn’t enough they have to figure out how to pay for all billions of Pounds given to support companies and individuals during the worst of the virus.

            The deadline for the treaty stipulating relations with the European Union is December 31, 2020. Failure to agree a treaty by then would mean Britain leaving with ‘no deal’ which would result in total confusion and self-inflicted damage to the British economy. But, sadly, British negotiators seem to have adopted the ‘My-way-or-the-highway’ approach in these talks which were going to be difficult in the best of cases. This is fine if you have the upper hand which the UK most definitely does not. It needs friction-less trade with the EU far more than the EU needs an obstreperous, naively arrogant Britain.

            Unfortunately, Boris Johnson displays little interest in or knowledge of economics. Concerns of business and financial leaders worried about being cast adrift from the country’s largest and most important market interest him not at all. He loves the idea of so-called Global Britain able to form its own trade relations untethered to the cumbersome EU. In theory possible, but that requires the very diplomatic and bureaucratic skills scorned by the current government. It also requires management skills fatally lacking during the Covid-19 crisis.

            The government’s big hope is a trade deal with the United States. After all, Johnson and American president Donald Trump share a deep contempt of the European Union and a deep distrust of independent bureaucratic competence. 

Both of them believe sheer bluster can replace competence

But Johnson will soon discover that it is very hard for a small fish to negotiate equally with a whale. The only way the US would agree to such a trade deal is if Britain basically accepts everything the US wants – namely free access to the health care system and food markets.  This raises fears in many parts of the UK about soaring drug prices and lower food safety standards. Those fears may well be exaggerated but given their acceptance by a large part of the UK population they pose a real hurdle for Johnson. 

On a more practical note, there is absolutely no chance at all of any trade deal being completed before the US presidential election in November. If Joe Biden wins Johnson could face someone much more eager to work with the EU than with an ‘independent’ Britain. I suspect the priority of any trade deal with the UK would slide way down the long list of issues that any Biden administration would face. Johnson would quickly discover that the world is a very lonely place for medium sized countries not connected to any major economic bloc.

Boris Johnson Has Really Accomplished Something Quite Unique

People can love the Tories or loathe them. But up until now they were usually considered a ‘safe pair of hands’ for managing the UK government apparatus. They generally knew how the complicated business of government works. Now, Boris Johnson has achieved something truly quite remarkable in his relatively short time as British prime minister.  Governments can be incompetent. They can be hypocritical. They even can be arrogant. But rarely do they manage all three at once. Johnson’s government, in the short span of five months, has achieved this noteworthy goal. Rather like choosing the first three finishers at the Grand National. Extraordinary, really.

            Driven by ideological zeal not seen since the religious wars of the Middle Ages this government prided itself on being the anti-Establishment Elite. They were going to shake up the stodgy – but hitherto relatively efficient – government apparatus and consign all Brexit unbelievers to the Tower – if not worse. A rousing victory over Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour was followed by a lengthy victory lap. All ministers tainted with some residual affection for strong trade ties with the European Union were quickly purged and sent to re-education camps. They were replaced by nonentities whose only qualification seemed to be memorizing the new Tory anthem. This is the NEW Britain. We will stand proudly alone. We are at last free to develop trade relations with whomever we want. We will change Britain!  And on, and on, and on. You could just picture them marching  in-step proudly down Whitehall arms swinging vigorously under banners proclaiming the New Order.

            And then something unexpected happened. Reality. The real world in the silent, deadly form of Corona Virus slipped unseen under the door (as only a foreign virus would do) and began to devastate large portions of the population. While alarm bells were ringing in most other serious countries Britain’s prime minister – not known for hard work at the best of times – saw no need to interrupt his holiday. Infection, what infection? No reason not to attend a large sporting event or take part in Chinese New Year celebrations.

Infection, what infection. Nice timing, Boris.

            Meanwhile people were inconveniently becoming very ill and dying in large numbers. Again, other countries (dare I mention Germany) were taking early precautions and benefiting from a well-stocked public health service. The brutal, harsh, unforgiving light of this real crisis rapidly stripped away the millimetre-thin veneer of competence of this so-called New Elite. Ministers really didn’t have a clue how to respond and received no guidance from the top. Isolate? Don’t isolate? Keep schools and shops open? Close them? Let everyone get sick and pray for the best? Test and trace? What’s that? Whatever you do, don’t for God’s sake tell me Greece of all countries is testing and tracing!

            And this was even before we get to the sad state of preventive equipment or the catastrophe in care homes.  The PPE cupboard was bare and the government had to scramble around the rest of the world looking for simple things like masks and gloves. When a large shipment of masks arrived from Turkey most of them were unusable. The government never checked that they were made by a newly formed company in Turkey that had never, not once, made a mask. Well done, lads. The sheer bumbling incompetence of the New Elite has us longing for the bowler hats, rolled umbrellas, and pin-striped suits of the Old Elite.

            And then the draconian Lockdown. All of us – well, most of us anyway – were consigned to our homes to avoid getting or transmitting Covid-19. Better late than never – even if most European countries had instituted this policy long before. But then the back door – Heathrow Airport – was left wide open. Thousands of international passengers arrived each day and passed straight through without any testing or tracing at all. By this time the Own Goals were mounting up. The other team didn’t even have to try.

PM's favorite adviser, Dominic Cummings. 

            After almost two months of isolation things are starting to loosen up a little. But just as this is happening the truly hapless Home Office minister – unfazed by reality or the impossibility of enforcement -- proudly proclaims that she is firmly slamming the barn door shut after all the horses have left. All international air travellers arriving in Britain after June 8 must be quarantined for two weeks. Such a step might have been useful at the very beginning of the crisis, but now – when European countries seem to have gotten Covid-19 under some control – it is just pointless window dressing.

            So much for Incompetence. Arrogance is running a close second. Admit they made mistakes? You must be joking. Just send the bruised and battered Health Secretary once again before remorseless TV cameras to assert everything is under control. Of course we’ll have the required testing in just two weeks. Well, actually, better make that six weeks. Rather reminds one of the Charge of the Light Brigade. That didn’t work out well, either.

            Meanwhile, Hypocrisy is making a late charge on the outside. Remember, all of us are in this together. Stay Home. Save Lives. Save the NHS. Unless, of course, you’re a cabinet minister or key adviser. The government could have blunted the impact of wandering ministers and advisers getting caught by simply apologizing and saying it wouldn’t happen again. But then it’s only Old Establishment wimps who see the need to apologize for anything to anyone. This is the age of the Dirty Harry (Make My Day) Tory. Apologize? Of course not. Nothing to apologize for. We’re the new Elite. We can do whatever we want. Boris Johnson went so far as to say he was sorry that people were upset at his key aide’s journey. Not sorry about the journey itself, mind you. Just that some people were upset about it.

Who is running the country? Sir Humphrey or Dominic?

            And this is the team that is supposed to lead the UK to the sunny uplands of prosperity and national pride? Makes Yes Minister look very good indeed. Sir Humphrey, where are you when we need you?

Could Turkey Make Northern Cyprus Its 82nd Province?

Negotiations to end the decades-long partition of the critically-located Mediterranean island of Cyprus are set to enter a new and theoretically critical stage this week in Geneva. There have been many ‘final stages’ since the island was divided between Turks and Greeks following the intervention of the Turkish military in 1974. But there are great hopes, at least by international negotiators, that this ‘final stage’ just might work.

Much has happened since 1974, including the internationally recognized Republic of Cyprus – the Greek part of the island – joining the European Union. The northern, Turkish part of the island, remains internationally isolated, recognized only by Turkey. The Turkish part of the island survives on hundreds of millions of dollars of subsidies from Turkey. The Greek part of the island has recovered from its financial meltdown and is buoyed by the promise of natural gas in its territorial waters.

Will the island re-unite or be split completely?

The rough outline of the Plan A solution to the island has been well known for decades. It would involve the Turks giving up some land, compensation for people on both sides who lost property, keeping some sort of local autonomy for the Turks, and ending years of economic and political isolation by joining the southern part of the island in the EU.  Sounds logical – to the outsider. But the deep, underlying distrust and dislike between the two communities have always been major barriers to this settlement.

Furthermore, there is the very sticky issue of ‘guarantors’ – those three countries of Greece, the UK, and Turkey who were supposed to ‘guarantee’ the stability of the island. This guarantor system failed spectacularly in 1974 when the Turkish army landed to protect the Turkish minority – and in the process left several thousand troops on the island who remain to this day. If there is a settlement what happens to this guarantor system? Will the Turkish troops leave the island? Will the Turks accept the security of the European Union instead of the security of their own troops?

Will they actually leave the island?

            However, beyond all these island-based issues there is a real elephant in the room that could scuttle all hopes of a deal. That elephant is the political maneuvering in Turkey to change the governing system of the country to give President Tayyip Erdoğan unfettered, unchallenged, unchecked power. Turkey's prime minister and parliament would be reduced to feeble rubber stamps with this change.

            In order to get the votes he needs in parliament to pass the constitutional changes Erdoğan needs the support of the Nationalist Party – a party who not only hates the Kurds but loathes the very idea of a settlement on Cyprus that includes the reduction or complete withdrawal of Turkish troops from the island. Even with the support of the Nationalist Party the issue is a near run thing. Several members of the Nationalist Party have balked at supporting changes reducing parliament to an afterthought. And there are even reports, nothing more, of ruling party AKP members who don’t like the idea of an all-powerful president.

            Assuming the bill passes parliament, there will be a national referendum to approve or reject the change to a presidential system. While Turkish polls are unreliable at best, a leading poll shows support for the referendum falling short of the required 50% + 1. Failure at the referendum stage would be a disaster for Erdoğan by puncturing his aura of invincibility and denying him the power he so blatantly wants. This he cannot allow.

            Thus, the elephant in the room of the Cyprus negotiations. Erdoğan could easily whip up nationalist sentiment in Turkey (not hard to do) by stonewalling any change in Cyprus. The brilliant Turkish journalist Metin Munir – now reporting from the safety of Cyprus because no paper in Turkey has the nerve to publish his work – says there is a Plan B being actively discussed in Ankara. That plan is simply to annex the breakaway Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus making it Turkey’s 82^nd province if negotiations fail. Such a move may bring international condemnation, but would be immensely popular among the nationalist Turks.

He would sell himself as the great savior of our valiant Cypriot brothers and win the referendum in a landslide. Any opposition would be drowned in cries of national traitors, tools of foreign powers seeking to destroy Turkey. Such a campaign would be ugly but effective.

            International condemnation of such a move would have no impact whatsoever. It would only strengthen the deeply ingrained feeling that a Turk has no friends but a Turk. Erdoğan would loudly point out that the world did nothing to stop Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Therefore, why should he even listen to any criticism? The European Union would howl and scream. But so what? Turkish/EU relations were already at a dead-end. How much worse could they get? Greece would complain bitterly. But Greece is in no position to do very much. What would the United States do? That’s a very good question. No one has a clue at this point about Trump’s foreign policy which so far has been limited to 140-character tweets. Besides, right now most Turks think that America is behind every problem that Turkey is facing. Russia? Who knows? Putin is currently manipulating Erdoğan brilliantly. But will that manipulation extend to allowing dismemberment of Cyprus?

            Threatening Turkey with harsh economic sanctions won’t work. The Turkish people will gladly suffer mere economic hardship to preserve what they see as national honor. And furthermore, Putin will simply move into any vacuum created by Western isolation of Turkey.

            Any possible settlement on Cyprus is going to have to pay as much attention to political fine tuning in Ankara as it does to developments on the island itself.

Finally Some Good News For Greece?

After more than eight years of being confined to the European Union’s intensive care ward with systemic, near-death, and highly contagious economic and political maladies is Greece finally ready to hobble out of bed? Although the team of EU fiscal doctors, aided by consultants from the International Monetary Fund, is not completely convinced there has been a noticeable positive shift in the tone of comments from friends and family.

We spent several months in Greece last year, and the mood was unremittingly gloomy all the time. Almost every conversation began and ended with a litany of the country’s problems: the idiocy of the government, the evil of the creditors, the collapse of the financial system, and on, and on, and on. The newly elected Syriza government, together with its tragi-comic finance minister Yiannis Varoufakis, was trying desperately to implement its version of the almost universally unsuccessful leftist economic and administrative ideology. All it succeeded in doing was to demonstrate its own incompetence and find new and unique ways to infuriate the people who were trying to keep Greece afloat. At one point, people on various islands were seriously investigating ways to secede from mainland Greece and create their own little versions of paradise.

While the underlying economic reality may not have changed very much, the election of a young, very smart, and dynamic leader as head of the main opposition New Democracy party has injected a whiff of change, the possibility of something better. Kyriakos Mitsotakis is the scion of one of Greece’s leading political families, but people should be careful of thinking of him merely as new wine in an old bottle. In addition to showing himself to be politically astute, he brings an impressive educational and professional resume to the job.

           

Kyriakos Mitsotakis -- the new leader of New Democracy

He graduated summa cum laude from Harvard and has graduate degrees from Stanford and the Harvard Business School. In addition to idiomatic English, he speaks French and German. He spent time in London working for the McKinsey consulting company. He also served as Minister of Administrative Reform in the government of Antonis Samaras from 2013 – 2015.  I met Mitsotakis several years ago when he was managing director of the venture capital arm of the National Bank of Greece. We worked on a cross-border investment project involving Greece and Turkey, and I found him smart, pragmatic, and focused on solving problems rather than advancing any particular theoretical approach.

Greece’s European partners will breathe a sigh of relief at the prospect of dealing with someone in Athens who literally, and figuratively, speaks their language. They would be making a serious mistake, however, to think that Mitsotakis will roll over and accept anything that comes out of Brussels. What they may well find is that instead of facing the profoundly unserious bombast of Syriza, they will be facing deeply analytical, thorough, and logical counterproposals to defend and advance Greece’s position. If Mitsotakis ever gets elected prime minister his counterparts in Brussels better be prepared to send the A Team to meetings with Greece.

Many of the people I spoke with on the island of Andros and in Athens greeted his victory in the race to lead New Democracy as a sign of very, very cautious hope.

“We hope, we wish,” said one shop owner. But with an expressive shrug of her shoulders she added, “But we really don’t trust any government anymore.” She, like thousands of other small businesses, is caught in the uncomfortable position of facing mounting taxes long before there is a hint of the economic recovery that could provide the money to pay the taxes.

A financial analyst in Thessaloniki said that Mitsotakis’ election has “re-energized the middle class. He is the flip-side of Syriza.” Others say Mitsotakis represents an important change in perception.

“Look, nothing fundamental has suddenly changed in Greece. Unemployment is still about 20%, the banks are fragile, and it looks like the capital controls will have to stay in place for the rest of 2016. But, in our politics, perception is very important. And right now, Kyriakos is benefitting from the perception that he may be the one to lead us out of this quagmire. The same dynamics of anger at the existing government and hope for change that brought Syriza to power in the first place could now benefit Kyriakos.”

Mitsotakis is certain to face the charge that he is nothing more than the latest manifestation of the dynastic politics that have plagued Greece for generations by focusing on punishing perceived enemies and rewarding clients rather than solving national problems. Another senior executive laughed and said ‘clients’ are nothing new in Greek affairs.

“Go back and re-read the Iliad. Homer gave the gods plenty of ‘clients’. Hera and Athena, for example, worked hard for the Achaeans while Aphrodite supported the Trojans. Kyriakos will undoubtedly face pressure from some so-called ‘clients’ but I think he is clever enough build bridges rather than simply settle old political scores.”

Under his very new leadership New Democracy has already received a bounce in the polls that puts them a few points ahead of Syriza.  It remains to be seen if Mitsotakis can ride this momentum to victory in a general election, but at this point not very many people would bet against that possibility.

War Alone Will Not Protect Us From Global Terrorism

We have seen and heard it too many times before – the wailing sirens, crowds gathered helplessly around scenes of carnage, words of solidarity with the victims, and the vows to chase the perpetrators to the ends of the earth.

And yet in response, more often than not, we wind up chasing our own tails. Even our successes in killing this or that terrorist leader soon degenerate into a deadly game of ‘whack a mole.’ Eliminate a terrorist in Syria, and his counterpart pops up in Yemen, or Sudan, or Libya, or Iraq.

An all-too-familiar scene

We also hear ringing declarations of ‘war’ – although it is not exactly clear just how and with what that ‘war’ is to be waged. Whose troops will be used? Where will they be used? And, most importantly, what happens after the military objective is won? Yes, a particular den of barbarians may be wiped out to everyone’s great – and temporary – satisfaction. But who will fill the vacuum? How can we be sure the same problem won’t crop up as soon as the troops return home in triumph with ‘Mission Accomplished’ banners waving in the air? In short, defeating the entity called ISIS will not, by itself, put an end to the larger problem of global terrorism.

Once you have ‘won’ such a war, how do you reconcile the ensuing conflict among the various local factions, each of whom has its own agenda. Olivier Roy, one of the leading scholars of political Islam, highlights this problem in an essay in The New York Times. The Kurds, for example, will fight to protect their area, but are not enthusiastic about fighting ISIS on behalf of the Arabs. The Saudis are in no rush to destroy their Sunni brothers in ISIS lest such action strengthen their main enemy, Iran. Israel, for its part, is delighted to see most of its enemies busy trying to destroy each other and relieve the pressure to do anything about Palestine.

So what can Europe do to protect itself against the outrages of global terrorism? A good place to start might be with far better defences. The Schengen agreement allows free travel throughout most of the EU member states. Once admitted into one of the Schengen countries people are allowed to travel to any other member state without worrying about visas. This attempt to emulate the United States where you can travel freely from California to Maine is admirable, but it omits one critical difference. The United States has a common policy for its external borders. As any foreign traveller can tell you, coming into the United States at any of the entry points is not that simple. Forms need to filled out before you get on the plane, the no-fly rule is checked, and you are finger printed upon arrival. These steps may not eliminate terrorists entering the United States, it makes it more difficult.

Europe, on the other hand, does not have a unified approach to its external borders. Some borders like the United Kingdom can be difficult to cross, while others are porous. Two of the weakest states in the EU, Greece and Bulgaria, have enormous pressure on their borders and the least amount of resources to deal with the problem. One problem is that low paid police and border officials are vulnerable to bribes from well organised people smugglers to turn a blind eye toward illegal entry. Many times these countries simply do not have the equipment or manpower to scrutinize ordinary travellers let alone vet and process the wave of immigrants coming from places like Syria and Libya.

This is not a problem for Greece alone

If the EU acted as a real union a common border policy would be imposed on all members. There would be one well-funded European agency with well-paid and well-trained personnel to handle security of external borders. The surge of migrants would no longer be just a Greek, Bulgarian, Italian or Spanish problem. Such a move would inevitably generate wails of protest about violating national sovereignty, but without such a solution the European Union is hardly a ‘union’, and remains easy prey to anyone seeking to create havoc inside the EU borders.

Obviously, solving the problem of external border control does not solve the issue of home-grown terrorism – be it deranged teenagers with high powered weapons in the United States or dissatisfied members of the Moslem communities across Europe. A threat in, say, Belgium can easily morph into a catastrophe in France. One would hope that seamless cooperation among the various intelligence agencies in the EU would ease this problem. But if the United States has problems coordinating activities of its several different intelligence agencies within its borders think how much more difficult it would be coordinate such activities across international borders. The Turks, for example, insist they warned the French about one of the attackers in Paris, but apparently nothing was done about this warning.

A longer term solution would be to restore a semblance of stability in Syria. Once people can be reasonably sure of going about their daily lives without getting shot they would be less eager to risk the trip to Europe. This alone won’t solve the problem of global terrorism, but it certainly would eliminate one of the contributing factors.

The Greek Crisis Has Some Dreaming Of Independence -- From Athens

The only funny thing about the sad situation in which Greece finds itself is reading essays about what the Greek people ‘must’ or ‘must not’ do from renowned economists and leading academics writing comfortably from their offices thousands of miles from the turmoil. They are not the ones lurching from crisis to crisis worrying about when the money runs out, when the pharmaceuticals run out, when their pensions run out, or even if the food runs out.

Even Nobel Prize-winning economists like Paul Krugman urge the Greek people to rejectthe latest proposal from the creditors and risk leaving the Euro and returningto the drachma. Surely, he opines, this would be better than submitting to the even greater ‘austerity’ required by the creditors. Greece would be free of the creditors’ shackles and resume growth quickly. Nothing demonstrates the dangers of long-range analysis better than this.

In a perfect world Krugman might be right. If, and it is an enormous ‘if’ Greece had a smoothly functioning bureaucracy, a government determined to institute sweeping reforms, a political class not wedded to corruption and cronyism, and no deeply entrenched groups from  protected business interests to pampered public service employees with a strong interest in preserving the dysfunctional status quo such a recipe might work. But, alas, we are dealing with the reality of modern Greece and not some theoretical classroom exercise. And that sad reality is that without those sweeping reforms what remains of the Greek economy, regardless of the currency in use, will most certainly contract further.

Syriza could have been an agent of change. It could have instituted long-overdue reforms and, in the process, generated the revenue to improve the welfare of the people. Instead, it has proven to be nothing more than an extension, a particularly incompetent extension, of the failed political system that has decimated Greece over the last several decades. And the sad thing is if it had committed to these reforms it could have minimized the hated ‘austerity’. And the really sad thing is that the price of this intransigence is being borne by the very people Syriza said it wanted to help – the poorest sectors of the Greek population.

It chose instead to implement its school-boy theories, which by the way have not worked anywhere in the world, and substitute revolutionary rhetoric for real achievement. In the process their hypocrisy and deceit have succeeded only in alienating just about everyone who was in position to help. It would have been interesting to see, for example, if the creditors would have taken a softer tone if the government had moved aggressively on revenue producing reforms like privatization or breaking the stranglehold of protected businesses. But all we heard were thunderous pronouncements against such steps. One could almost hear the Euro Group, the IMF and the IMF pleading with Syriza to ‘give us something to work with.’ But the only thing that emerged were half-baked demands for debt reduction. Fine, but in return for what – precisely? I can imagine Christine Lagarde, managing director of the IMF, asking the Greek government what it would do to help itself.

One can argue that the European institutions made a serious error a few years ago by bailing out the private banks that had recklessly loaned massive amounts to Greece. How often should tax payers be required to rescue private banks that should have known better? When do they these banks have to pay the price for their mistakes? Wouldn’t it have been much better to force those foolish banks to take the necessary hair-cut to reduce Greek debt to manageable levels? The problem was only compounded when public institutions assumed that debt. All this may be true. But, as The FinancialTimes Martin Wolf puts it, those are now ‘sunk costs’ and it is time to move on.

Meanwhile the drama is played out on the streets of Greece as most economic activity grinds to a halt pending the outcome of Sunday’s so-called referendum called by Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras. The 72-word question is a ridiculous summation of complicated financial discussions that very few people can possibly understand. The legal grounds for the referendum are not even clear, because currently there is NO deal on the table. What, exactly are people voting on? Whatever the stated question may be, most people seem to understand that the real issue in this referendum is Greece’s position not only in the Eurozone but in the European Union itself.

A friend on the island of Andros had an interesting solution to his anger at the government and the uncertainty of the current situation – independence. “We should immediately declare independence from the oppressive, idiotic regime in Athens! We could build a real economy here based on out maritime history, but including other centers of excellence such as financial and health care.” All it needs now is a Declaration of Independence. We are, after all, close to July 4^th.

"They've Succeeded In The Impossible. They've Made Jersey City, New Jersey Look Better Than Greece!"

There is, unfortunately, very little optimism about the critical meeting on Monday, June 22 with Greece and its creditors. There is very little reason to think that the institutions controlling much of Greece’s enormous debt are going to bend on their demands for economic/social reforms in Greece before releasing more cash. And there is even less reason to hope that the rigid ideologues that now run Greece have the slightest intention of implementing reforms that might help Greece but would weaken their political position.

            If the talks fail there is a very good chance that Greeks would rush to pull whatever funds they have left out of the banks, thereby creating the situation that would call for capital controls. Another logical consequence is that Greece would fail to make scheduled payments to the International Monetary Fund and would start on the slippery road to default and possible exit from the Euro.

            A reasonable person might think this is a scenario to be avoided at all costs. It could plunge Greece into the economic unknown and severely intensify the poverty and hardship already suffered by many in the country. But that same reasonable person would be making the same mistake that Greece’s European counterparts have been making for the past five months, i.e. believing that the ruling Syriza party has any interest in compromise or making a mutually beneficial agreement.

            All one had to do is listen closely to Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’s comments at the opening of the new parliament or the comments of other Syriza MPs and ministers to understand the total commitment to a failed ideology. Various Syriza MPs have said over and over again that the government should never sign a deal and that returning to the drachma with the ensuing economic chaos would be a very good thing. The Minister of Education said a key policy of his ministry would be to eliminate the concept of excellence in education. Who knows? Perhaps in his mind such a thing as educational excellence smacks too much of the dreaded elitism. Maybe he really does think a generation of morons can compete with the Chinese and Indians who have no problem promoting excellence. In his opening speech Tsipras mentioned four times the Greek word roughly translated as equalization. Only now are people realizing that his version of social and economic equalization is to drag the top down, not bring the bottom up. In his brave new world everyone is the same – they’re all desperately poor with no hope for the future. Even today at the 11^th hour Greece’s finance minister Yiannis Varoufakis is saying that he hopes the creditors will fulfil their responsibilities to save Greece and, by the strange extension of his unique logic, all of Europe. Needless to say he failed to say much about Greece’s own responsibility to come up with a realistic compromise.

            In the beginning many in the European Union thought Tsipras’s opening remarks last winter were just part of electioneering. Surely, they thought, he would become more rationale in time, and separate himself from the leftist ideologues in his own party. Wrong. A Greek journalist friend in Brussels made an interesting observation early in the negotiations. “Too many people here think there is a difference between the ‘good’ Tsipras and the ‘bad’ hard left element of the party. They’re wrong. There is no difference at all.”

            Perhaps the most surprising element of all, however, is the inability of very smart people in Greece to mount any opposition to these destructive developments. Where is the broad-based communication program pointing out to ordinary Greeks just how much they will suffer under new drachma regime? Why leave the moral high ground to Syriza? Perhaps there is a fatalistic acceptance of what is considered inevitable.

            I remember a dinner party last fall in Athens when a group of lawyers and businessmen were discussing what would happen if Syriza won the election. Most were modestly hopeful that disaster could be avoided. One former bank executive had a very succinct response to the question. “Train wreck. Huge train wreck. That’s what will happen. Perhaps from the rubble we can build a good economy.” That certainly was a conversation stopper.

            Another businessman, one who pays all his taxes and obeys the country’s labyrinthine regulations was beside himself with anger. “These liars will ruin everything! They are going to turn us into the North Korea of the Aegean. They have no idea of the damage they are causing for generations. Any young person in Greece with an IQ of room temperature will leave.”

            But again, why are these sentiments restricted to private conversations? Where is the leadership of the opposition? It takes more than dry speeches in parliament to counter Syriza’s bombardment of mis-information.

            An exasperated Greek-American who recently moved back to Greece is re-thinking his decision. “These idiots in government are ruining what could be paradise! They have succeeded in something I thought was impossible. They have made Jersey City, New Jersey look better than Greece. That takes talent.”

            

"If You're Going To Shoot Me, Shoot Me! Just Get On With It!"

ATHENS -- Fatigue, exhaustion and frustration seem to have descended on Greece like a cloud, dampening the natural exuberance and underlying optimism of many people. They are simply worn out by speculation on the outcome of endless negotiations that achieve nothing, the daily struggle with total uncertainty about their economic future, and the barrage of contradictory proclamations from an inexperienced government. “We are on the verge of an agreement with the creditors! There is no agreement! We might agree to privatise some state assets. We will NEVER sell or lease a single state asset!” And so it goes. Meanwhile hapless citizens are caught in the middle of a frightening maze.

“If you’re going to shoot me, shoot me! Just get on with it,” cried one anguished citizen. “I’m tired of this mess. We’ve been dealing with it since 2008 and there is no end in sight. I just want it over with, one way or the other.” One housewife said she hardly leaves the house these days. “I sit home on my sofa all day watching TV hoping to see some developments. Nothing.  All I’m doing  is wearing out sofa fabric.”

How many Greeks feel at the moment

More galling perhaps is the loss of self-esteem. “We used to be proud to be Greek. We were considered the home of democracy, the worthy heirs of the likes of Plato, Aristotle, and the great playwrights. Now Greece is considered just another unruly little country stuck onto the bottom of the Balkans. It’s embarrassing to admit that you’re Greek these days,” says one Brussels-based Greek.

In the current, rapidly deteriorating economic situation cash is king. No one knows if the banks and all their ATM machines are suddenly going to close. Tourists are advised to bring lots of cash. Many businesses are forced to pay cash for raw materials because suppliers limit credit to only the largest of companies. The central government has stripped municipalities of their spare cash in a desperate attempt to meet pension payments and pay creditors.

The Syriza government swept into power in January with the promise that it would stand up for the ‘little man’, roll back the hated austerity program, and force the country’s creditors to renegotiate a much more favourable package of repayments. This simply hasn’t happened. A lethal combination of inexperience, arrogance and party disunity led the new government to badly overplay its already weak hand.

For four months the Greek people have been living on promises of a better tomorrow. But that tomorrow keeps receding further and further into the distance. Faced with an intractable Eurozone making demands that a fractured, internally chaotic Syriza simply cannot deliver the government faces some unpalatable choices that could rip the party into its constituent parts.

            Some more bizarre members of the ruling party want to dump the whole negotiating process. They openly call for leaving the Eurozone in favour of the old currency, the drachma. They ignore the horrific costs of such a move for the average citizen they claim to represent. Among other things, this move would certainly reduce food supplies in the country. Greece imports about 75% of everything it eats and drinks. How are the stores going to pay for these goods with a sharply devalued drachma? How is the present generation of Greeks going to react to shortages it has never seen?

One ruling party MP, Costas Lapavitsas, blithely, almost cheerfully, admits – from the safety of his academic sinecure in London – that going back to the drachma would, of course, entail a return to rationing of most of life’s basic items – a condition Greece escaped decades ago. I'm not sure how most Greeks would react to standing in line with their ration cards waiting for their daily bread. He also says that Greece should re-align its foreign relations away from Europe, and by implication the United States, and cosy up to such economic power-houses as Venezuela, Iran and China. Never mind that Iran is working hard to re-join the Western world and that Venezuela is flat broke despite its vast oil reserves. Tough to see Greece doing much of deal with China after repeatedly refusing to let a Chinese company buy the portion of the Port of Piraeus it doesn’t already own. Maybe he meant Greece to copy that other Asian powerhouse -- North Korea.

While most of the world has moved on from this Stalinist economic view, it does represent a strong faction within the government, and demonstrates clearly why any agreement with the Eurozone could split the party wide open. This partly explains the hesitant, confusing approach of the Greek government toward any deal with its creditors to keep Greece in the Euro. The Syriza government itself may not have a clear, unified approach. Who speaks for the government?  Ministers are constantly contradicting each other. The government is caught in a bind. Sign a deal, break up the party. Reject a deal, lose Greece. That’s a tough choice for a party filled with people trying to run a country on the basis of revolutionary rhetoric more suited to university agitation than actually running a real country.

Does Tsipras even want a deal with the creditors?

Unable, or unwilling, to make that choice the party may resort to a referendum to solve the dilemma. Let the people choose whether to stay in the Euro or return to the drachma. Fine in theory. Difficult in reality. How exactly will the question be worded? Will the banks have to be closed during the period of the referendum to stop massive withdrawals? Will capital controls have to be imposed? Will people clean out the supermarket shelves and start hoarding just in case the country goes back to the drachma? The only thing that is clear at this point is that the resilience and endurance of the Greek people are stretched to their limits.