Insofar as the new constitution was concerned, it was unlikely that Mr. Karamanlis, whose New Democracy Party has 216 deputies out of a total of 300, would run into any serious problems. The new constitution was drafted, voted on article by article and finally ratified all in a record time of five and a half months. On June 11,1975, it became the supreme law of the land. The only cloud that cast a shadow over the jubilation of the administration was the absence of the Opposition from the parliamentary benches. The Opposition had abstained from voting on the constitution because it considered the powers it vested in the President of the Republic to be so excessive that they could create serious problems for the democratic cause in Greece. The academician and deputy, Constantine Tsatsos, a personal friend of Mr. Karamanlis and chairman of the committee that drafted the constitution, chided the Opposition for refusing to participate in a democratic dialogue. ‘Democracy called them to be present’, he said in parliament, ‘spitefulness keeps them out.’ On June 20 Mr. Tsatsos was sworn in as President of the Republic having been elected by a vote of 295 to 210 in Parliament.
Before the new constitution was enacted, however, a parliamentary ‘coup’ occurred on June 4 during the debate on Article 111. The parliament was to consider a government-introduced amendment which would have forbidden members of the deposed royal family from holding public office. The hour was late, 3:00 a.m., and out of a total of 300 deputies forty were present. When the Speaker (the President of the Parliament) announced the amendment under consideration, a storm of disapproval rose from the government benches. The gist of the protest was that it would be improper to deny the members of the ex-royal family privileges granted to even the humblest Greek citizen. The amendment was defeated by a vote of twenty-six out of forty.
The matter does not end here. The blame must fall on the Speaker of the House and the chosen representatives of the people. How could the Speaker allow a vote of such significance to the political future of the country to be held when less than one-seventh of the deputies were present in the chamber? And why did the majority of the deputies, aware as they were that the amendment might be discussed that night, prefer the comfort of their beds to their parliamentary benches? Under such circumstances, the twenty-six ‘putschists’ could, with the majority they had at that time, have awarded a medal to Papadopoulos and Ioannidis for their services to the nation. The incident did not go without comment, however, from the leadership of the New Democracy Party. Two days later, the Secretary General of the Party and Minister to the Prime Minister, Mr. George Rallis, declared, after holding talks with the ‘rebelious’ deputies, that he was convinced there was no question of a pro-royalist movement. Furthermore, responsible government circles repeated earlier official declarations to the effect that the early return of the former Greek king as a private citizen was considered inexpedient.
Politics, however,’is a science of manoeuvres and the possibility of Constantine returning to Greece to lead his own party by the end of the year is not to be excluded. Such an eventuality would be awkward for all parties (save for the left) and particularly for the government’s New Democracy which now attracts most of the right-wing support. Thirty-one percent of the country’s electors cast their ballots in favour of the King in the December 1974 plebiscite. Faced in a future election with choosing between the King and Karamanlis, many will choose the former. With the votes of only two-thirds of the those who supported the monarchy in the plebiscite, Constantine’s royalist party could well become the ‘loyal opposition’! Thus, if the current Opposition’s proposal for a decree to forbid the king from any political action is rejected, we may yet see Constantine tossing aside his princely robes, becoming the leader of a party or even Prime Minister.Perhaps even President of the Greek Republic!
THIS is the Balkans. It’s not a X joking matter’. This phrase from a northern Macedonian song is surely understood by the Greek government. Early in July a mission consisting of the Prime Minister, Mr. Karamanlis, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Bitsios, and the Undersecretary to the Prime Minister, Mr. Lambdas, will return from the Bulgarian capital. The Prime Minister knows that peace and friendship in the Balkan area are necessary preconditions to the progress of this country. The aim of Mr. Karamanlis’s trips to our Balkan neighbours has been the establishment of a treaty, to include Greece, Yugoslavia, Rumania and Bulgaria, and to be based initially on bilateral agreements. (Asked about the participation of Albania and Turkey, Mr. Karamanlis replied, ‘We will invite them. If they wish, they may join us.’)
A delicate problem arises before such a treaty can be signed, however. Both Bulgaria and Rumania are members of the Warsaw Pact and follow Moscow’s lead. Reports emerging from Vladivostok claim that the USSR and the USA have once again divided — Yalta fashion — the world into new zones of influence. If these reports are true, then the only way that the USSR could indirectly intervene in Southeast Europe, would be to allow, if not encourage, the two socialist countries to participate in such a treaty.
We are not in a position to know what the contents of a Balkan treaty would be. In all probability it would include economic and cultural exchanges between the member states; condemn interference in each other’s internal affairs; and specify peaceful negotiations as the only means to resolve differences. The effectiveness of such a treaty of ‘friendship and non-aggression’, however, would be, inevitably, a legal and political matter. The populace is not interested in the name that will be given to such an agreement; they are concerned about the peace and progress it might bring. These then are the developments thus far on the Greek side of the Balkans.
