A SPECIAL ESSAY: NEEDED AN ULTRAMODERN

"PETER THE GREAT" FOR GREECE

****************************************************************

By Professors Michael C. Geokas, M.D., Ph.D* and Christos D. Katsetos, M.D., Ph.D**

It is only a very vulgar historical materialism that denies the power of ideas, and says that ideals are mere material interests in disguise. Isaiah Berlin (In The Proper Study of Mankind).

Greece finds herself today at the crossroads of history. Despite EU membership, with funds available for infrastructure and other projects, the strategic location in Eastern Mediterranean, her magnificent natural beauty, which makes her by definition the Mecca of Tourism; her huge Merchant Marine plowing the oceans (about 205 million tonnage), an enviable heritage as the birthplace of Democracy and of Western Civilization; the brilliance, energy and spark of her people; and a four million dynamic Diaspora, located mainly in the rest of Europe, North America and Australia, and the overwhelming success of the Olympics 2004 that astonished the world, yet, several key ingredients are missing from the mix and the whole equation. Lest we forget, the Greeks with a per capita GNI (Gross National Income) of $22,000 have now broken even the famous dictum of Herodotus: Elladi Penii Aikote Syntrofos Estin. [Poverty shall always be Greece’s companion].

Yet, despite all advantages and achievements, the country appears weak in the international arena and a number of significant problems have been accumulating, like droplets of mercury. The last straw that broke the camel’s back was the fiasco with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). A tiny Balkan country loaded with internal problems has won recognition from America for a plagiarized name “Macedonia”. This is a failure of Greek diplomacy and the country’s international dynamic. Moreover, Greek foreign policy is in disarray as related to Turkey, Greece’s nemesis, with the Turks having the upper hand at many levels. Even after the recent EU decision to start accession talks with Turkey, which Greece supported enthusiastically, Turkey’s monolithic and aggressive attitude has not changed.

PROBLEMS WITH TURKEY. Turkey’s refusal to recognize the Republic of Cyprus, a full EU member, the continuing attacks against the Patriarchate, perpetuation of the casus belli against Greece and the relentless air-space violations over the Aegean, are all ominous signs. Frankly speaking, Greece’s foreign policy doctrine aiming to tame Turkey by supporting her entry into the EU, has proven to be unproductive and a striking failure.

On the contrary, Greek-Turkish relations are becoming increasingly strained and problematic. Turkey has continued to pressure Greece with persistent efforts of the Turkish Air Force in an attempt to demonstrate de facto co-ownership of the Aegean, with frequent Airspace violations costing dearly to the Greek taxpayer at 1,250,000 Euros daily (and $1.3 billion from 1998 to May 2003). The Greek Air Force has to be constantly on alert for chasing away the intruding aircraft. During the last 31 years 115 Greek pilots and 197 aircraft have been lost.

There is unrelenting Turkish obstinacy in Cyprus, and covert pressure through FYROM, the Muslim minority in Thrace and through Albania. The following are just a few examples in this regard: The Website of the Turkish Foreign Ministry fully adopts the FYROM propaganda against Greece. Using historical links and religious ties, Turkey pursues a long-term plan in Albania that includes-but is not limited to- an ambitious investment in infrastructure. The deployment of Northern Cyprus flags during a soccer game in Tirana is emblematic of the underlying sentiment promoted by Turkish operatives and sympathizers in Albania. When FYROM foreign minister Mitreva visited Turkey last year she was received in Ankara with funfair, her visit was extended and given wide publicity. The meddling of Turkey with the Muslim minority in Thrace, is exemplified by the inappropriate statements of visiting Turkish officials and the disturbing role of the Turkish Consul in Komotini, who habitually violates the Vienna agreement (April 18, 1961) concerning the laws [and] regulations of the receiving country.

In addition, the Turkish authorities have pursued a relentless policy of annihilation of the remaining Greek community in Istanbul. The longstanding closure of the Halki Theological Seminary, the blatant violations of religious freedom, the humiliation of the Ecumenical Patriarch (whose Ecumenical role is not even recognized) and the confiscation of Patriarchal properties, clearly suggest a deliberate strategy of ethnic cleansing.

Due to the Turkish-Israeli alliance of 1996, Turkey is still a favorite country in America, and her special treatment continues despite huge internal problems, and refusal to permit passage of American forces to Iraq, during the war and her recent hosting of a Hamas delegation in Ankara. The new oil pipeline from Baku to Ceyhan is hailed as crucial for an oil thirsty world. Moreover the strong US support to Turkey for EU membership is persistent, as is the support for the Annan plan, which is designed to favor Turkey and to legitimize her occupation of 38% of Cyprus. The rightful rejection of the Annan plan by the Cypriot people has generated displeasure in the US. However, it now appears that Turkish-US relations are on a downswing due to American support to the Kurds in Northern Iraq and other issues.

The fact remains that despite EU and NATO memberships, Greece is diplomatically on the defensive, with many in EU and the United States still favoring Turkey, despite her poor record on human rights, and bellicosity of her Armed Forces which are not under civilian control. The piece-meal revision of the Turkish constitution of 1982, including the abolition of the death penalty and National Security Council (NSC) membership changes, are deemed insufficient, short of a new constitution based on a veritable EU template.

The evidence of bad intentions and insincerity abound, such as Turkey’s constant antagonism on the Cyprus issue; and the persistent violations of Greek Airspace mentioned above. Many believe that the blatant interference of ongoing Greek military exercises in the Aegean (a long-term strategy aiming to establish “gray zones” in the region), coupled with the covert support, to FYROM and Albania, are probably designed to place Greece into a pressure vice. Finally, the aggressive and some say premeditated collision of a Greek and a Turkish fighter over the Aegean on 5-23-2006, with loss of the Greek pilot, coupled with the audacity of Ankara to ask for reparations, represent the final proof that so far Greek foreign policy towards Turkey is a failure.

SOME INTERNAL PROBLEMS. Some other significant problems are the following: The high unemployment rate; the high cost of living since the adoption of the Euro; and the low wages as compared to the rest of the EU, which feed a pervasive corruption, involving even members of the judiciary; the poor condition of the Health care and Educational systems,

with dysfunctional High Schools and Universities and about 50,000 of the young studying abroad; the problem of Traffic Safety with unacceptable numbers of deaths and injuries; the porous borders on land and sea with thousands of illegal immigrants coming in constantly (most of them illegal); the calamity of low fertility rate (TFR 1.3), with 200,000 abortions per year and about 100,000 live births; the steady aging of the population, with 20% over 65 and no proneitalist program in place for achieving even replacement fertility, with the exception of a small successful program run by the Church; and no sophisticated programs for assisting assimilation of immigrants and for stemming the tide of new arrivals projected to boost the total number to 3.5 million between 2015-2020(Joseph Chamie UN).

Additionally, Greek Tourism is weak, the quality and numbers of tourists being at the down-slope of Butler’s Curve, especially the coveted American tourists, with loss of about $5 billion per year. Furthermore a mafia-style under-world, and trafficking of humans and drugs are thriving, and some of the mass Media are owned or under the thumb of big money, a situation which the Prime Minister promised to clean up. Relations with the United States are correct; despite anti-Americanism and relations with Turkey is the thorniest problem in Greek foreign policy.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE? We strongly believe that what the Republic of Greece urgently needs is a strong magnetic leader, and courageous reformer, who will galvanize and inspire the Greek people and their Diaspora, by implementing a cultural and organizational revolution. Such a leader is needed to solve the present daunting problems of the Republic. The Greeks are extremely smart people, but notoriously difficult to govern. However, they will respond positively to a strong and inspiring leader who will propel them into action. A man who will transform the partying, have a good time culture, into a work ethic and increased productivity, which will astonish the world, like the 2004 Olympics did.

In all of history, during the last 1,000 years, one man shines like a giant beacon in this respect, Peter the Great of Russia, the Revolutionary Tsar. Who was Peter of Russia? “And why the freakish appearance of this autocrat in the European stage and his unique spirit, and enormous accomplishments, are deemed relevant several centuries later?”

-1-

PETER OF RUSSIA: He was born in 1672 in Moscow and died in 1725 in St. Petersburg. He was buried in the Peter and Paul Cathedral and the people still to this day bring flowers to his tomb. Peter B. Putnam, in his Book, Peter the Revolutionary Tsar, describes him as follows: “It was the pace, scope, and violence of Peter’s reforms that made them revolutionary. Moreover, the revolution was personal. He not only send others abroad, but went (abroad) himself. He hired foreign shipwrights, but build ships with his own hands”. His personality and massive reforms have inspired generations of historians, writers and ordinary people. Peter’s revolution was unique.

Arnold Toynbee called Peter “the archetype of the autocratic westernizing reformer. He has provided a template for the leaders of all developing nations since his day and nobody else followed him more closely than Joseph Stalin who tried to do from 1928 to 1941 to Russia, all over again, what Peter had done for her about 230 years earlier”. –3-

Stalin described Peter's program of modernization as “a unique attempt to leap out of the framework of backwardness”. Peter's revolution was also unique, Putnam says, “as he became the personal instrument and embodiment of change”. Peter was also a good listener and he constantly asked foreign ambassadors how he could advance Russia.

They told him: “Sire, you need trade with other nations and for that you need a merchant marine and for that you need a navy to protect it”. And this is exactly what he did by going abroad to learn shipbuilding. Putnam, describes that ‘‘he also made enormous progress in the field of Education, by setting up the Academy of Sciences and by founding schools of navigation and engineering in the capital and cipher schools in the provinces… he quadrupled foreign trade and his heavy industry surpassed that of more advanced nations. His methods were autocratic, but iron production was three times that of England and helped to make Russia a great power.

He tried to modernize the civil administration as illustrated by that of Sweden, thus creating a nation governed by rule and precept, and not custom and caprice. In Sweden, Denmark and Prussia government departments were run by boards called Colleges. Peter was told that Colleges were the solution for good administration and that their mechanism was like that of watches: whose individual parts mutually keep each other in motion. He sent Russians to study Colleges abroad and appointed westerners to his Colleges to provide their expertise to Russians’’.

“Special target of his determination and anger was official dishonesty, because corruption was widespread and public office was mostly considered to be an opportunity for getting rich. Only half a dozen of Peter’s large group of assistants were indeed honest. At one occasion he was so angry that was ready to issue a decree, which would punish with hanging any official who had stolen enough money to pay for the rope. One aristocrat mastered the courage and asked Peter: does the Emperor wished to be without subjects? We all steal he said, some more and others less, some privately and others without disguise. Peter laughed and tore up the decree’’. However, everybody got the message.

“To stamp out corruption, Putnam says, he appointed certain officials called fiscals who became the best-hated men in the empire. Official corruption continued to exist but after Peter it was at least accepted as wrongdoing. During Peter’s reign foreign trade quntrupled. Western nations dominated trade with Russia. Like a colony exchanging raw materials for finished goods she could not manufacture for herself. The sharpest exception to Russia’s dependence in the West was military. Peter understood clearly that unless he could modernize his arms industry Russia would remain a second-class nation. Peter produced armaments on a huge scale and in a single generation his heavy industry surpassed that of far advanced nations.

He attempted to do a lot more than could achieve in a lifetime and his role was an impetus to the future”. Putnam says, “he was a living paradox: a visionary and a pragmatist, flexible and adamant, frugal and prodigal, patient and passionate, self-sacrificing and self-centered. But he pushed Russia to the future with his spirit, with his energy and his love for her. This giant of a man possessed endowments and ambitions to match. This was Peter the great of Russia, a revolutionary leader who propelled his nation into the future’’. He initiated in effect a veritable Cultural and Organizational Revolution. ‘’Peter continued to live simply, wore old clothes and had few attendants.