“What is history?, our answer, consciously or unconsciously, reflects our own position in time, and forms part of our answer to the broader question, what view we take of the society in which we live.”
—E.H. Carr
Are there turning point in history? Probably not in history itself, but surely there is something in ourselves that demands that certain historical moments are seen as turning points, not only to be remembered but also to be acted on. The referendum and the subsequent drama of whether the SYRIZA government would reach a deal with our creditors is (not was) for many such a moment.
For New Democracy (ND), ‘2015 and all that’ plays a central role in its anti-populist narrative. Events pre-2015 hardly need mentioning. The clientelistic state, in particular the use of Nationalized Industries’ recruitment policy, non-transparent military procurements, the extraordinary waste of EU funds and so much more that led to Greece’s debt crisis can be quietly forgotten. Nor is there any need to labour over the fact that by the autumn of 2014 the second structural adjustment programme had been derailed, the debt had not been restructured, the fiscal consolidation was nowhere near to completion (2014 closed with a primary balance whereas the goal was for a 4% primary surplus), and Greece would need around 22 billion euros to cover is debt financing for 2015. Irresponsible governance had not led to the debt crisis and mistaken policies during the first two structural adjustment programmes to address it were relegated to secondary importance, if they were mentioned at all. Rather 2015 was for ND the beginning of an anomalous populist adventure that first in opposition, then after 2019 in government, it managed to negate. Without 2015, ND’s current narrative of stability in the economy and governance would make even less sense that it does.
It is a paradox that PASOK, which purports to be a party of the centre-left, shares much of the above. It was, of course, heavily involved in both the previous structural adjustment programmes. Its own narrative of political self-sacrifice to save Greece from debt default, which the rise of SYRZA supposedly derailed, has proven a weak hand. Not least because it has been as aggressive as ND in its attack on protests against the first two structural adjustment programmes and in particular the phenomenon of the squares. Given it was in government 2009-2014, some critique of the various protests is understandable. But to cut yourself off from all criticism of structural adjustment programmes and the policies of austerity represents a serious repositioning in terms of political geography, not least because it implies that future PASOK governments would not rely on popular mobilization in either the winning or the exercise of power.
For those of us involved in the events of 2015 from the side of SYRIZA there was little chance at the time to think of the historicity, or not, of the period. The hostility of our creditors, not to mention of the opposition within Greece, was such that self-reflexion beyond the issues at hand was nigh on impossible. The referendum, negotiating the third structural adjustment programme, the September 2015 election, the first reviews of the programme, the disgraceful antics of the IMF that imposed on us measures well beyond those agreed in the difficult summer of 2015 were hurdles that had to be addressed one at a time. Only by 2017 could we begin to plan ahead as the exit, together with a serious restructuring of the debt, seemed increasingly likely together with a serious restructuring of the debt. The balance between gains and losses has been written about by many of the participants, and need not be repeated here.
Speaking for myself, as the Finance Minister responsible for coordinating the negotiations with our creditors, 2015 represents the most significant period of my life, the greatest challenge I have ever faced, the most pressure, when the possibility of disaster was never far away. But now I see it from the perspective of the society in which I live, one that is facing economic stagnation and political instability. And I have come to realise that for many of us the possibility of contributing to changing our society in the future relies in part on achieving a delicate balance of what we keep and what we leave from our previous experience. Defending it to the hilt, as if did not constitute a major reversal of the expectations that SYRIZA built up in its attempt to reverse austerity, is as self-defeating as ignoring what was achieved, not only the exit from the programme with a restructuring of the debt but also that this was achieved while at the same time reducing inequality and poverty. The 31.5% that SYRIZA achieved when it lost the election in 2019 reflects both of the above.
But in one final sense 2015 has not proved to be a turning point for society as a whole. There has been very little serious public debate on the issues raised. I have written with others a book that covers all aspects of 2015 and beyond. Not one of our major critics in the political sphere felt the need to respond to our detailed arguments on, to take just two examples, why the first six months did not cost 80 billion, as our critics claimed, or why our tax increases were a direct consequence of the fiscal situation bequeathed to us. I cannot believe that such a strategic neglect would have been possible in, say, France or the UK. Nor have those on the Left, that argued that we did not need to capitulate after the referendum, addressed my oft-repeated argument that all three teams that Yanis Varoufakis set up to investigate the possibility of finding tools to extend the time available for negotiation replied that there was no such possibility. For much of the Left, 2015 is a turning point of betrayal and this influences their strategy still, with deleterious consequences for the wider Left.
Hence the title of this article. Just like the critique in 1066 and All That of the “bad king John” tradition of history, written by Yeatman and Sellar in 1930, the history of 2015 is discussed in terms of, depending on ‘your view of the society in which we live’ bad prime ministers, genuine dates and a number of good things. It is not a firm foundation for any society seeking to exit a period of prolonged crisis.
The greek version of this article was published in Kathimerini newspaper on Sunday 29/6/2025