With deep dives into the SYRIZA-Progressive Alliance’s governmental past, plenty of “friendly fire” among comrades, and repeated references to their return to opposition benches, the two-plus-hour debate between the four contenders for the party’s presidency unfolded. From the very first moments, the participants enthusiastically plunged into the battle of impressions.

Highlighting their rivals’ weaknesses more than presenting their own policy platforms, the four finalists—Apostolos Gletsos, Pavlos Polakis, Sokratis Famellos, and Nikolas Farantouris—spent valuable time and personal political capital shadowboxing. They struggled to adhere to the agreed-upon framework, often exceeding their allotted speaking times, gesturing emphatically, and occasionally interrupting each other.

Although the first thematic section, focused on the economy, offered all four leadership candidates the opportunity to establish a clear political and ideological stance, their anxiety was evident. This manifested in successive pointed questions among themselves, where the confrontational dynamic between Polakis and Famellos immediately stood out, alongside an exchange of “friendly fire” between the two prominent party figures.

Kasselakis “Present” in Absentia

From the very first round of what Famellos called a “tele-dialogue,” differing perspectives on SYRIZA’s future programmatic approach became apparent. Pavlos Polakis defended a “radical” government program, Sokratis Famellos emphasized the need for a “unified discourse” and credibility, Nikolas Farantouris highlighted his European orientation, while Apostolos Gletsos drew upon his extensive experience in local government.

However, programmatic discourse was conspicuously absent for much of the debate. Former party president Stefanos Kasselakis was a figurative presence, enduring a barrage of criticism from his former comrades. Without directly naming him, Gletsos defended the necessity of holding a party congress, while Pavlos Polakis launched a full-frontal attack on Kasselakis over a question regarding the alleged existence of “black funds” in SYRIZA-PS.

According to Polakis, “There were no black funds in SYRIZA. There was a false asset declaration” by Stefanos Kasselakis. Polakis argued that Kasselakis should have disclosed a range of companies he was involved in. “Can you imagine a leader of a leftist party, a CEO in a tax haven in the Marshall Islands? If we’d known, he could never have become president. I take my share of responsibility for believing in him. It’s a lie that the judicial mafia targeted his family,” claimed Polakis, who also labeled as “shameful propaganda” Kasselakis’s comments on the Mati wildfire tragedy.

“Why would we hide the death toll? To achieve what?” Polakis countered Kasselakis’s accusations about prior knowledge of the number of victims. He then sharply criticized the former party leader for his stance on the same-sex couples’ bill, accusing him of aiding the Mitsotakis government, which lacked a parliamentary majority, through the imposition of party discipline.

Famellos on the Offensive

Famellos directly challenged Polakis midway through the debate, openly asking how many more mistakes the party could endure with Polakis at the forefront. Polakis responded by claiming that his contributions far outweighed his errors.

In the same vein, Famellos attempted to corner Apostolos Gletsos as well, asking him to clarify his remarks about sex workers, which had caused controversy within the party. Gletsos responded by asserting that disagreements within SYRIZA should be resolved within its collective bodies.

At the same time, Sokratis Famellos rejected Nikolas Farantouris’s proposal to establish two Vice President positions in the party, advocating instead for a stronger role for SYRIZA’s collective bodies in the future.

However, in Farantouris’s view, SYRIZA should convene a Constitutional Congress where delegates would decide which European parliamentary group the party should join moving forward.

The newly elected SYRIZA MEP faced several questions regarding his ability to perform the duties of party president while also serving in the European Parliament. Farantouris emphasized that the main opposition party must primarily restore its “lost credibility” within European decision-making centers.

Apostolos Gletsos, for his part, adopted a more categorical tone in several sections, firmly dismissing any suggestion that he might vote in favor of the Mitsotakis government’s budget, or parts thereof, in the future.

“Responsibility Meter”

Meanwhile, Pavlos Polakis and Sokratis Famellos made a prominent attempt yesterday to allocate responsibility, as they saw fit, for the recent events within SYRIZA, focusing primarily on the “Kasselakis era.”

Pavlos Polakis attributed his decision to support the former SYRIZA president last year to the trust shown by members of the party’s Transparency Division who knew Kasselakis. Famellos also engaged in self-criticism, stating that he had voiced his political disagreements with Kasselakis both to him personally and within the party’s collective bodies.

Nikolas Farantouris excluded himself from the framework of personal and collective responsibility within SYRIZA, while Apostolos Gletsos revisited the issue of reforms in local government.

Among the array of statements from the SYRIZA PS presidential candidates, there were occasional commendations, even indirect ones, of the movement’s historic leader, Alexis Tsipras. However, Pavlos Polakis reiterated his criticism of the size of the fiscal “cushion,” arguing that the over-taxation should have been concluded by October 2018.

Major Absentees

In any case, it was difficult for any of the participants to stand out in terms of visionary programmatic discourse or leadership qualities, as the discussion was dominated by reflections on SYRIZA’s actions over the past decade. Notably absent was any mention of a future outlook for progressive alliances.

Apart from a closing remark by Famellos, none of the SYRIZA PS presidential candidates unveiled their positions on future programmatic collaborations, inevitably limiting the scope of their audience, despite being hosted on a public broadcast.

Within this context, there was no reference to neighboring parties such as PASOK or the New Left, nor to the new party structure, which all members will be called upon to embrace starting December 2.