Blog

The "shallow state": executive - and non-executive - institutions and individuals

By Alexandros Mallias, Ambassador H.E.

1. The atmosphere is heavy. The personal indifference and incompetence of some, perhaps many, "competents" and the inability of politics to make rational choices due to the "forced" coexistence with the so-called -euphemistically- "deep state", which I propose to rename "shallow", dampen -I rightly estimate- our willingness to see at this moment what is happening beyond our borders. Despite the significant efforts and reforms, which have undoubtedly been made in recent years, the role of the state saddens us, crushes us and continues to disappoint us. It was created to fit in with government policies over time, to serve them and to "fit" the style of its appointed executives, government, civil service, executive -and non-executive and union. At all levels.
2. The tragic term "train crash" is, unfortunately, also used in international relations. As in Tempe, conflict, war and human sacrifice are neither inevitable nor fatal. This is not about the "bad time" and the "wrong turn" that are summed up in the bad-sounding and hypocritical stationmaster's "aman". A representative example - and this - of a Greece that continues, as things show, not only to exist, but to raise its head and resist progress, seriousness, control, responsibility and accountability.
   And this, despite the great efforts that have been made, to claim - with claims and with specific achievements - our entry into the era of digital governance. I tend to conclude that this is more a work-achievement of certain individuals, primarily the competent minister and his staff associates, than a holistic and generalized revolution of mentality. This effort undermines, sometimes successfully, the "shallow state" and the personal, official, business and guild interests invested in it. These, that is, which fuel the all-powerful two-way relationship and dependence with political power.
3. This is a chronic absence and negligence of political and official awareness of the magnitude of the problem of the “shallow state”. Arbitrarily, I confess, that is how I choose to call it. It is not about the “deep state”. Even if it is convenient, regardless of party color and shade. That exists diachronically, raging as a leader or subordinate to successive governments and their choices. The shallowness of the “shallow state” causes the wreckage of institutions, organizations, executive structures and, ultimately, of politics itself. Despite the progress that has been made in the reform, reorganization and adaptation of the “deep state” – a component of the exercise of politics, after all. Politics, ultimately, reflects the general state of the state and, however, the official and human errors that lead to tragedies are undoubtedly attributed to it.

It thus emerges that the transition to the new era - in the Greece of promise - is not taking place, as is proven by the facts, in an organized manner. Rationality, value judgment and official suitability control are subordinated to political, personal, party, union, association, guild, official and institutional opportunism of dubious expediency. After a celebration, like scandals and tragedies, we "discover" the pretextual, deficient procedures, excesses or discounts in the problematic functioning of institutions, services, organizations and individuals.

4. A catalytic role in the -self-proclaimed- state is played by its mechanisms, the functioning of institutions and, of course, individuals. I am referring and standing, of course, also to the process and criteria for selecting individuals for critical and responsible positions in the broader state mechanism. The use of optimal policies for utilizing the human potential of individuals, that is, in combination with the necessary and indispensable synergies, could contribute to enhancing efficiency, but also to preventing shipwrecks, derailments, conflicts and natural disasters. Our tragedies. It is axiomatic that prevention is always preferable and more effective than the, ex post, attempt to "reorganize". However, this elegant medical term (established, mainly, but not only in orthopedics), which I hear every day now, concerns -exclusively- the ex post correction of the damage, of the badly written ones. The effort is legitimate and necessary, although belated. However, it does not bring back the lost.
   A key role in undermining trust in politicians and policies is played by the impression - for some, the belief - that, ultimately, the punishment of crime and those responsible for a tragedy, from being a subject of political, official or criminal responsibility, is transformed into an object of inter-party - perhaps even supra-party - transaction and political compensation. This is a threatening phenomenon.
5. I should also note that in interstate relations the so-called "reorganization" does not overturn the "faits accomplis". Territorial or diplomatic-political. Whereas, in other words, "faits accomplis" have already been created in the military or political-diplomatic operational field. Due, among other things, to the lack of understanding between political and military leadership, as well as to the non-functioning and observance of the prescribed institutional procedures. We have had such a historical incident in the last 27 years. Unfortunately.
6. It is our duty for national institutions, mechanisms and organizations not to be so adaptable. Not to mutate so easily, with such painful consequences each time, obeying political and personal expediencies. It is wrong for institutions to shrink in order to adapt to situations, interests, persons and dubious political choices. The selection of persons should finally be done from the beginning and not after a celebration, based on the prestige, credibility and effectiveness of the institutions. Whether they concern the State itself and the staffing of governments, or the system and the National Security Services, or even our representation in Parliament and, of course, in the European institutions (European Commission and European Parliament).
7. Without ignoring that we do not have exclusivity, an endemic -over time and paradoxically- Greek phenomenon is for institutions to be lowered in order to adapt to individuals. Even those, unfortunately, who are assigned to the service of National Security. And above all, to lower, for reasons of expediency, the criteria for selecting the individuals who staff them in order to serve specific expediencies. Institutions and mechanisms are closing in, so that unsuitable, unqualified and inexperienced individuals can "fit" into them.

The Prime Minister of Greece has had a National Security Advisor since 2019. It is a matter of hope, however, that he now also has a small-member National Security Council. Who prevented its establishment in the summer of 2019? Who is still putting up obstacles in 2023? Is the time right to implement the announcements made four years ago. If not now, when? The day after that lockdown, since the damage will have been done in the meantime, again with the logic of "reorganization"?

8. I repeat that, 27 years after Imia, no one seems to have felt the need or seen the usefulness of taking the initiative of a broader political understanding for our long-term strategy with Turkey. That is, for the political leaders to sit down and, with a sense of responsibility, discuss in confidence the entire complex of Greek-Turkish relations. Mainly, however, the next day. Tomorrow. We are all discussing with all the prime ministers of Turkey. For 20 years, all of our prime ministers, without exception, have sought to talk to Mr. Erdogan. It is good, necessary, useful to have the possibility of direct conversation. But is it so difficult for them to talk to each other? I have been asking the same question over and over again. The answer from everyone is, every time, the same. Should we sit down with them? And yet. This is a reaction that I don't hear from anyone when it comes to talks with the political leadership from the east. There is intolerance only for the discussion between us.
9. I systematically and consciously avoid externalizing my anger. I have learned from my own mistakes. I know that momentary “relief” of the emotional state does not contribute to correcting the wrong texts. However, many of our moderate fellow citizens around me are angry. They do not shout, they do not declare, they do not demonstrate. They vote - unless they decide not to vote. I would not be surprised if, in the end, we are stunned by the low participation rate in the upcoming elections. A conscious act of abstention can move to a historically high level. This does not simply constitute a “punitive anti-systemic vote”. It is, unfortunately, a negative vote against the very functioning of our representative parliamentary democracy. Abstention is a strong vote of disapproval. It concerns us all.
10. 10. I am concerned, therefore, hearing many serious - consciously moderate - friends who wonder whether they should vote. Is there time to be convinced? To do so, it is enough for them to be convinced. To regain the shaken trust in specific individuals and in political practices. Mainly, however, in institutions. Political communication, in this era, falters, has failed and, ultimately, has been defeated. Is this understood?
    Now, caution, prudence and understanding of the so-called "systemic" political forces are required. A real "reorganization" instead of cheap and superficial politics, as well as the impression of a compensation for mistakes. A brave and selfless initiative is needed. "The March Species" show that: even if they hope - with varying degrees of certainty and probability - and fight for electoral victory, the long-awaited first place or even an encouraging percentage, it will be difficult for them to avoid a proportional distribution of the accumulated disapproval, if there is not, from now on, a minimum of understanding. The government has against it an "incomplete", misguided and unconvincing axiomatic opposition. So how can it take the lead and with what content? Can it?
11. Maybe, by proposing the "Understanding of Hope". Explaining that so many efforts and so many achievements that have been made, especially in recent years, cannot be wasted. That the slogan "never again" which we often hear in Europe, but also within borders, finally has serious guarantees of becoming a reality tomorrow. That we do not need psychoanalysis or flogging, to understand and correct the image of today's Greece of the two extremes. We are and live in the same country that:
    – it has managed to radically reverse its problematic image in the economy, to the extent that it is considered a model,
    – has achieved, in a very short time, an unprecedented strengthening of its diplomatic and defensive power and, at the same time, possesses unprecedented and convincing "soft power" and the most cutting-edge weapons systems.
    – largely claims first place as a destination of choice for over 30 million foreign visitors.
    -to successfully fight, exceeding even the most optimistic calculations, the battle for the simplification of procedures through digital modernization.

On the other hand, this same country often gives the impression that the state machine is under-functioning or, when it is functioning, it is due to luck, good coincidence and the heroism of a few. The dramatic public confession of Greek railway users that "we live by coincidence" should not and should not be a characteristic of Greece. We have an obligation to highlight and support the other Greece. The prerequisite now is the recovery of the trust that has been shaken. Anger and indignation should not guide our vote.

12. I read, 50 years ago, the book of a judge and academic who became the first President of the Hellenic Republic after the Reformation. It is Michael Stassinopoulos. In his book “The Lentil Chart and the Law of the Wolves – Essays on Human Behavior” (Friends’ Publications, 1972) he writes about the unworthy and their successes: “…in a paradoxical way, the same thing happens with the phenomenon of those who reach high places without deserving it. Since they reached there without merit, none of them is higher or lower. Leader and messenger, they are all equal. The bad method, the use of “other” means, flattens them all. All positions are flattened, therefore, because the method by which they were acquired has stripped them of their original meaning. Because the importance of positions is morally intertwined with the normal and just way of occupying them. From the moment they are not occupied with dignity, they also lose their importance - and, therefore, in this weakening of them, they are leveled..."

https://www.alexandrosmallias.com/to-richo-kratos-epitelikoi-kai-mi-thesmoi-kai-prosopa