A profound and pragmatic knowledge of the reality of our relations with Turkey dictates a ratio of 3:5 in military equipment in order to secure balance. This approach had been the official external affairs policy of the Greek state regarding Turkey for many years now. At one point, before the recent Greek economic crisis, when rumours about armament bribes were made public, politicians stopped telling us whether this ratio was in fact still maintained. This was a time of peak political antagonisms and large amounts of money diverted towards political campaigns, so that the electorate would change their political allegiance. Thus, the expenses for the army became a non-priority, bribes and private provision were increased, and the budget for the armed services, and mainly for purchase of military equipment, was reduced! Our arms industry, which had always been of limited capacity, was used for cheap political and opportunistic point scoring. The result was that our war industries fell into financial dire straits and were about to be shut down!

   Our neighbour did exactly the opposite. In spite of the many unstable military dictatorships that they previously had, they managed to stabilize their political system, to put their economy in order in spite of the high inflation the plagued their finances for decades, and to industrialise their country by building upon their strong rural economy and training the large manpower of the countryside. They also secured many contacts in terms of external affairs as equal partners with other countries, even with those which are much more powerful and populous. Certainly, it was mainly through economic development, which was achieved through the stability of the political system, that the morale of the Turkish citizens was raised. Their politicians combined religion and politics, and within this framework they attracted large societal groups, which greatly benefitted from the 2-digit economic development increases, and household finances improved in the long-term.Turkey developed high-efficiency war industry projects, co-financed by high-tech European and American companies, and our neighbour is now able to deliver very costly military materials, such as airplanes, submarines and tanks.

   We insist that in circumstances like the present one, boosting the morale of the Greek population is of the utmost importance. If we examine our past, we will observe that all our sucesses were triggered by high morale: the 1821 Ιndependence War, our victories of the 1912-13 Balkan wars, the epic of 1940. We need to develop the appropriate conditions for the “leap forward”. We need to get through the present low point to which we were led by long-term financial breakdown and political antagonism. We have proved that during adverse circumstances in the past, we were capable of such a “leap forward”: the 1821 revolution happened after the suppression of previous uprisings and the killing of many guerrilla warriors by the occupiers. Our 1912-13 victories happened just a short time after the disastrous war of 1897. The epic of 1940 was achieved after deep divisions, numerous military coups d’état, and the Metaxas dictatorship of the previous decade.

     It is up to our politicians on all levels to implement policies that will gradually help form a common point of view, a common ground and a consensus as to how threats against Greek sovereignty should be dealt with. If consensus is formed, then the necessary steps on the diplomatic level and the funding for the necessary military equipment will have the public support needed, while implementation and success in these fronts will be easier to achieve. If we can all agree now on a common ground, it will be much easier to agree again in future, when the need to find a point of common reference will rise again.

   This is the kind of news that the average Greek citizen expects to hear, so that he/she feels somewhat safe, when he/she hears again renewed threats from our neighbour on the east. Citizens will be able to budget more efficiently, will use their resources in the best possible way and will support our national defence goals to their best ability. This applies to all Greek citizens, but particularly to us Maniots, because in the past we have responded extremely well to such messages for unity and cooperation, using all the resources available at all levels. In the past, we have proved that we can put aside our personal differences, join forces, harness talent, and ultimately find common ground in order to deliver solutions for external threats and containing their effects.  

   Citizens and politicians, now is the time to reflect on the lessons our ancestors have taught us. Now is the time to take action according to their example.

At the beginning of the new decade the political landscape seems cloudy. The whole world, and in particular Greece, is faced with dire circumstances, which are the result of poor political decision-making during the last decades. The fact that the political and economic situation in the competitor countries has improved makes the situation in our country even worse. The hope for determined intervention on Greece’s behalf by other friendly states has been overestimated. Unfortunately, in our country we do not even have the unanimity needed to face the complicated issues that lie ahead. It seems that the only thing we can do is to display individual courage so that we can manage the complicated problems that we are faced with.

   Bravery was the virtue that characterised our ancestors in similar circumstances. This has been proven by their stance during the corresponding decades of the 20^th and the 19^th centuries. Because of their bravery, they were able to deal with problems disproportionally severe compared to the small size of our country and to the limited political and military resources of such a small population. Until the beginning of the 20^th century, the vision of “the greater Greece of the two continents and the seven seas” was simply an unreachable dream. Before that, until 1820, the possibility of putting an end to the Turkish rule was also considered utterly unrealistic. However, in both these cases, two brave men rose above the difficulties and brought results favourable for our country, results which before could only have been dreamt about. Venizelos, a master in politics, external affairs and diplomacy, was able in 1920 to materialise the dream of the “greater Greece of the two continents and the seven seas”.  Papaflessas (“the mad priest”, as people called him) was able in 1820 to inspire his compatriots, so that they acquire the necessary courage to abolish the servitude and to get our country liberated from the formidable Turkish rule.

   Unfortunately, what usually happens is that after the first enthusiasms and the successes of brave patriots, division follows, due to greed, pursuit of personal interest and egocentricity. The toppling of Venizelos’ government and the “Asia Minor Disaster” occurred in 1922, just two years after the brave exploits of 1920. The same happened with the civil wars of the period 1824-1827, which could potentially have led to the loss of everything that had been won through the bravery of 1820.

   It is beyond doubt that Maniots have always been extremely brave. Unfortunately, we can also be extremely divisive, a fact that was observed in both decades of 1920-1930 and 1820-1830. In the first case, the unanimous enlisting in the victorious wars of 1910-1920 was followed by the deep division of the citizens in two groups: the followers of Venizelos and the royalists, a division which brought catastrophic results during the next decade. In the second case, the unanimous enlisting in the victorious independence wars of 1821 was followed by the discord between the leading warlord families of Mavromichalis and Mourtzinos and the troops they commanded in Mani; this conflict reached a peak during the governance of Capodistria and brought subsequent catastrophic results.

   What is needed during these hard times is not only bravery, but also continued unanimity and agreed upon planning and actions. If this base exists, then it is almost certain that competent leaders with strong personalities will emerge, who will be able to create the right conditions in order to manage the current complicated issues.

   Of course, creating the positive climate that will bring the right conditions is the responsibility of the political parties, and the political system in general. The central government is responsible for creating the conditions for consensus. However, this is only possible if the opposing parties also recognise the need for these particular consents. It would be a blessing if the general consensus regarding sensitive issues such as national sovereignty could also be applied to other areas. Political parties should be able to express their ideological mindset in calm and resolute terms, while always keeping in mind the seriousness of the issues to be dealt with.

   On the municipal level, it would be a good idea if the pluralistic municipal councils in Mani could achieve a common base of understanding on issues of public interest, and could express these positions in a low-key, matter-of-fact manner. It is certain that the expression of the political word in calm terms will help bring unanimity in the small communities of our region.

Recently there has been a new round of discussions about public works, focusing on the cause of specific issues, such as delays, direct or indirect reinvoicing, defective and even unsafe construction. However, it seems that these discussions do not address the primary reasons for this dismal situation, but instead address issues of minor importance. It seems as if these discussions are directed towards finding an alibi and providing justification for the incompetence of those who undertake to carry out public works on the state’s behalf. This ineffectiveness is observed in all stages, from the allocation of funds to the completion and delivery of the public works.

Ineffectiveness and lack of transparency as far as public works are concerned have reached new heights.  It seems that our country holds the record in this area, while the reasons for this predicament are many and hard to define.  In the paragraphs below, we will attempt to examine in hierarchical order not only the actions, but also the omissions of those who manage all stages of public works (legislation, invitations to tender, completion and delivery), as well as their accountability for the negative results that are observed and recorded by the general public of the areas where they occur. There are four (4) categories of people who should be held accountable for this deplorable situation, as described below.

First, central government politicians. Since they have the jurisdiction to legislate, they can define firm and rigid regulations regarding the development of public construction projects, from planning to completion.  It is necessary that a rigid framework also allows for healthy competition between the civil engineering companies that will study and carry out each construction project.  Healthy competition should be based on a detailed statutory system,

which regulates the technical description of each project as well as the requirements and conditions of the tender.It often happens that during the course of a particular project, situations arise that can only be solved in court. A clearly and precisely identified framework with tight deadlines for these court cases and with strict legal consequences for those who do not abide with this framework is also necessay.   The identification as highly punishable “specific criminal offences” of transgressions and collaboration between guilds that have formed cliques during the course of a public construction project would have a dissuasive effect on this type of wrongdoing, which has become quite common.

Second, the municipal politicians and officials appointed by the local politicians. Since this group is politically responsible for the planning and completion of technical projects in their area, they should also be responsible for the detailed technical and financial study of each project as well as for the clearly defined conditions of the tender. There are many advisors in the municipal governments who can  provide reliable information regarding the specific requirements and characteristics of each category of technical projects.

Third, the technical staff who examine and supervise the public construction projects. This group is supposed to support the work of the municipal politicians and officials of the previous paragraph and make sure that the regulations for the technical description of each project as well as the requirements and conditions of the tender are respected and closely followed. This is the group that comes into direct regular contact with the people who carry out constructions projects, watch every step of the works at the constructions sites, verify the quality of materials, check

the work done behind the scenes and ultimately decide whether the project meets the safety standards.

Last, the contractors. They are a likeable group, which has acquired a bad reputation because of many unsafe and substandard technical public projects that they have undertaken. Construction deficiencies are usually reported by citizens of the area and also sometimes exposed by adverse climatic events. The quest for profit is not in itself reproachable, as long as it is compatible with the quest for safety. Before accepting a public project, contractors should make sure that they are actually able to deliver the services as promised and at the agreedupon price, without compromising the materials or the construction standards and within the agreed upon time-limits. If the contractors are simply after the highest profit, then they will make dubious political and financial deals, as well as compromises in many areas. They are the ones who will take all the blame for the inefficiencies, because it is the contractors that the public sees at the building sites…

Any time that the above-mentioned four groups of people do not abide by the rules, they are guilty of conflict of interest in the best scenario and guilty of fraud, misappropriation of funds and corruption in the worst scenario. No matter how big the efforts to cover a misdeed are, Econometrics has shown time and again that there is a very heavy price to pay for defective construction of public works: it is a huge monetary loss for the country, which negatively affects the national growth expectations and the  living standard of the citizens. This is of particular importance in areas like Mani, which receives very limited subsidies for public work contract

LAND REGISTRY AND FOREST REGISTRY: BUREAUCRATIC INEFFICIENCIES PROVE THE INADEQUACY OF POLITICAL MANAGEMENT

   Land registry and forest registry are two big national projects, absolutely necessary for the modernisation of our country, so that there is certainty about land ownership status. Completion of these surveys will lead to security of ownership and will create the necessary conditions for the recovery οf the construction industry, which in turn will lead to tourist development and to more extensive crops. It is a positive element that the completion of these surveys was imposed by the EU through various memoranda (and paid by the EU) in order to spur growth in our country. For twenty years now, we have been receiving fat subsidies for the completion of these two projects, but we are still unable to finish them. This demonstrates the political inadequacy of the Greek governments, which in past years have been managing these overly generous subsidies. The governments in office failed not only because of incompetence, but also because they opted for implementation plans on the basis of personal interest. The ordinary citizens who were expecting that the completion of these processes would mean stability of their ownership status, now find themselves entangled in a long-term series of amendments to state decisions, renegotiations and adaptations of  public procurement contracts with contractors and subcontractors, bottlenecks in court battles, costly fees, and even worse, they have no idea when these vague, open-ended procedures will come to an end and registration for the whole land will be achieved.

   Recently published developments make the whole land and forestry registry situation even more uncertain. The Supreme Court has just ruled in favour of a citizen/land owner who claimed that essential data was not considered during the compilation of forest surveys in his perfecture. This has resulted in the annulment of all forest surveys for the whole perfecture, and it now creates a precedent for many more such claims on the part of land owners. The fact that during the last ten months since the implementation of the registration of agricultural land in the real estate cadastre only 20-25% of the land of Mani has been registered, leads us to the conclusion that even after the end of the latest extension of the registration deadline, not even half the land will have been registered. It is obvious that anything that has to do with the land and forest registration was conducted poorly and with the utmost sloppiness. Once more, the inefficiency of public administration negatively affects the average citizen. This has already been happening for some time as far as agricultural land and forest registration is concerned, but it will become even worse in the future, during the long remaining years until the completion of these two projects, which will lead to the modernisation of our country. Since the EU subsidies provided for this purpose have already been spent by various state governments, the high cost of the necessary registration procedures will be covered by the national budget, which means that the expenses will be rolled over to the average citizen through general and specific taxation. Once more, the public administration incompetence will become an additional financial burden for the Greek tax payers.

   The agricultural land and forest registration programs affect a large part of the population, larger than the number of residents in each municipality. These two projects are of major importance to society, and their handling, as far as both general guidelines and specific details are concerned, also fall within the jurisdiction of local and regional authorities. Municipal and regional politicians have easier access than the average citizen to central administration authorities and as a result, they could present to higher authorities and pursue issues which are of crucial interest (such as land registry) to their citizens.  Municipal authorities also participate in regional authority associations (Περιφερειακές Ενώσεις Δήμων) and central authority associations (Κεντρική Ένωση Δήμων), and they have open communication channels with the ministers of the government in office. Unfortunately, we have never seen in the press any such proposals presented to higher authorities. If such coordinated proposals were to happen now, the land registry procedures could be simpified and the whole implementation process could be accelerated; administration procedures would be streamlined and citizens would benefit financially. Regrettably, such interventions did not happen, and as a result, we now do not have any specific proposals that could be used in the new national draft law regarding land registry that will soon be passed by the Parliament.

   It should be understood by all that the word “development” is not an abstract one, but requires a multi-effect approach and is based on complex requirements, one of the most important being the mobilisation of the citizens and their representatives.

                                                                                                                                                                THE EDITORIAL BOARD

We believe that it is possible, but only under certain conditions. The first condition has to do with the reason for which candidates want to run in the municipal elections. The second condition is related to the establishment of the norms for a healthy competition between different ideas and proposals in these elections. In theory, it sounds as if these conditions can be easily met, however, in our country this is not a simple task. Of course, we do have some examples of local politicians who governed in the past in an honest way, they put the common good above their personal interests, were productive, left a legacy in the areas they governed, and their descendants are today enjoying a good reputation because of them. Unfortunately, in our time, the era of “homo economicus”, this kind of governance does not happen very often, and the results of poor administration are disastrous in many municipalities and regions.  

If the candidates and the elected politicians reflect on how they are going to balance their ambition and their ability for good administration, then good things will happen in the areas they represent. Problems will start if politicians are overly ambitious and overly confident about their management abilities. This leads to fraudulent situations with many negative results, one of which (not necessarily the worst) is the unwillingness to cooperate with the other elected politicians. When this happens, it leaves the door open for pursuing personal interest (not necessarily financial) transactions, which do not correspond to the common good or the needs of the societies that these politicians were elected to represent.

Humans, except for self-preservation instincts, also have innate ideas which connect them to society and nature. If politicians are guided in their administration by their higher selfless  ideas for the common good, then they will work closely together with other politicians, as required by the proportional representation system, and their self-preservation and ambitious ideas will be kept in check. When this happens, the pluralism of ideas and the exchange of opinions is rich, and the synthesis of these ideas is beneficial to everyone. One of the most useful things that elected politicians could do, would be to create an algorithm, based on sound criteria such as area, population, etc. of individual areas,  for the fair distribution of funds by the municipalities to local communities and by the administrative regions to regional units. In this way, the solidarity and the collaboration between the individual units, which constitute an administrative area, would be strengthened.

Unfortunately, political practice in our country, both in state and municipal politics, particularly in recent years, is not characterised by a spirit of compromise neither by social solidarity. It is very possible that this old and corrupted kind of practice will be continued by the new municipal leaders.  Whether regional agencies will be working for the common good depends greatly on the character of the newly-elected politicians. It is up to them to avoid personal interest deals, and to try to synthesise the ideas expressed by their electorate in a way that the highest number of people in their area is benefitted. If our politicians are inspired by a selfless way of thinking, then it is certain, that after a difficult beginning, they will be able to develop solid groundwork for future cooperation, which will benefit the area they represent.  This kind of healthy collaboration will also benefit the electorate, which will be thus encouraged to support the choices and decisions of their elected representatives.

We, as representatives of the association “Maniot Solidarity”, do not limit ourselves to being simple well-wishers for our newly-elected politicians in Mani and the Peloponnese in general. We state that we will be active, and we promise and that in our own small way will support initiatives and decisions like the ones we described above.

Political activism is a fundamental obligation for all citizens, especially for those who possess not only natural abilities and social solidarity skills, but also organisational and management skills, acquired through knowledge and experience during the course of their lives. Political activism based on ambition is not in itself reprehensible, as long as the political skills of a particular candidate exceed his or her ambition. History has shown that those nations, which elect politicians with high social solidarity skills, excellent organisational and managerial skills as well as ambition, have enjoyed peace and a high standard of living for a very long time.

The above thoughts are very relevant at present, now that legislation has enforced proportional representation in both the municipal and parliamentary elections. We have already witnessed an unusually high number of candidates in the municipal elections and a “flight” of current members of parliament from constituencies with few supporters of their political party. We have also seen misguided political events, tailored to the upcoming proportional representation elections. All of these activities show that in many cases, ambition surpasses the abilities, knowledge, organisational and managerial skills of candidates.  It seems that many candidates, in addition to ambition, also have strong personal interest motives, financial and otherwise. These situations are a source of great concern for the election of a competent government for our country in the near future, first in the municipal sector and then in the state sector, since both municipal and state elections are both taking place in the year 2019.

In other countries, the activities described in the previous paragraph could be dismissed as random and occasional. In Greece, however, at a time when we are trying to exit from the ten-year long financial crisis of our country, caused mainly by financial irregularities on both the individual and state level, these activities are a cause for alarm, danger and great insecurity for the future. We see that many candidates for the next elections are currently following the same practices that have brought the public sector to bankruptcy. We need to search for the causes that have led us to the present situation, and to find ways to avoid catastrophic consequences that always follow the kind of activities described above.

A study of the history of different countries and geographical regions in the world proves that political ethics is the basis for individual nations’ success. The citizens of nations, which for a long time have been governed with strong political ethics, have been enjoying high prosperity and social wellbeing. Unfortunately, in our country, political ethics is not one of our strengths. On the contrary, we have seen elaborate schemes of disguising the personal and political motives of some candidates and the parties they belong to. These schemes, combined with the political immaturity of many members of the electorate, often bring to power populist leaders. Once a populist government is elected, the negative consequences of its governance are simply a matter of time.  Post-election allowances given to certain groups which helped elect a particular candidate or political party, do not offer a permanent solution to the economic distress of these groups, nor contribute to balancing out financial irregularities among the citizens.  On the contrary, they create resentment among those who are heavily taxed, and who in effect are paying for the allowances given to elected politicians’ favourite target groups.

In countries which have enjoyed for many years stable conditions of social and economic balance, citizens are politically mature enough to see through political and self-serving schemes, and therefore populist governments are a short-lived and easily reversed phenomenon. In countries like ours, particularly in the present precarious circumstances, choosing political candidates irresponsibly can be suicidal, because it changes Greece from a country with an uncertain future to a country with no future at all. This is why it is imperative that the most important criterion for electing a political candidate should be his or her political ethics. Only in this way the municipities, prefectures and the state will finally have an ethical and responsible government, which can then build a reasonable future for the generations to come.

In the present difficult circumstances, the Greek electorate has a moral obligation to look beyond personal interests, friendships and family relations. We need to vote for those candidates who have displayed social solidarity, effectiveness, but most importantly, political ethics in their personal and professional lives.