Elections: A soul that is about to... emerge

Those who are talking about elections in October are right. Not because it “benefits” New Democracy, but because it benefits the country. A prolonged election campaign can only cause harm and create problems.

This article is an AI translation of an original piece published in Greek. Read original

Elections: A soul that is about to... emerge

Dear friends, good day to you all!

At a certain point, the discussion about the elections ceases to be political. It becomes a matter of administration and governability.

When the entire political world has its eyes fixed on the next—and possibly the one after that—election, the country finds itself in a prolonged pre-election period, regardless of whether elections have been called or not.

Decisions are delayed, initiatives are limited, reforms are stalled, and public debate shrinks to the question of who is leading in the polls and what the next balance of power will be.

That is where we stand today.

When the entire political establishment is focused on the next election, the country ceases to be governed with a four-year horizon and begins to be governed with a poll-driven horizon.

The government, understandably, still holds a parliamentary majority and technically has a year left until the end of its term. In practice, however, political life has already entered an election cycle. Ministers and members of parliament are touring Greece, television panels have turned into informal campaign platforms, and the public agenda is increasingly dominated by scenarios of electoral alliances, succession, and political balances.

The problem, however, is that the country is not in a period of political or economic “relaxation.” On the contrary, it faces a series of serious challenges.

Inflation continues to put pressure on households, having climbed to 5% in May. The housing crisis is evolving into one of the greatest social crises of our time. The cost of living remains the primary concern for citizens. The full absorption of European funds—with a deadline in August—and the implementation of critical projects require constant political and administrative vigilance.

At the same time, developments in the Middle East are heightening uncertainty. A protracted war in the region could trigger even greater turmoil in energy markets, supply chain disruptions, or even fuel shortages, as well as new price hikes across the entire economy. No one can predict with certainty the extent of the consequences. However, everyone realizes that the coming winter may prove to be a heavy burden, both in terms of energy and the economy.

In this environment, prolonging an informal pre-election period can only cause harm.

Because when the political class thinks exclusively about the ballot box, governance takes a back seat. Difficult decisions are put off until later. Reforms are postponed. Ministers act more as candidates than as crisis managers, and the country begins to resemble a passenger waiting on the platform, without knowing exactly when the train will depart.

Under these circumstances, invoking institutional normality is not enough. Yes, a prime minister has every right—and obligation—to serve out his four-year term. But there are moments when what is politically correct does not necessarily coincide with what is politically useful.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis faces such a dilemma.

The choice to extend the term may offer a few more months in power. It is not certain, however, that it offers greater governability. On the contrary, it may trap the country in a long period of political limbo, precisely at a time when clarity, decisiveness, and—as it appears—a renewal of the popular mandate are required.

Moreover, even the impending reshuffle reinforces this image. For when public debate revolves more around the individuals who will change ministries than around the policies that need to be implemented, then perhaps the problem is not the government’s structure but the political cycle that has now run its course.

Every government has its moment of peak and the moment when it begins to operate under the weight of the next election. When that point is reached, prolonging the situation rarely solves problems. It usually makes them worse. That is why the question is not whether the elections can wait. The question is whether the country can afford to wait.

In any case, the longer you delay a showdown that everyone knows is coming, the more you resemble someone trying to keep alive something that has already been judged. So, if a soul is meant to leave, it’s better for it to leave sooner rather than later.

 

v
Privacy