The Maximos Mansion is attempting to distinguish the case of Antonis Samaras from that of Kostas Karamanlis, rejecting the notion of a united front between the two former prime ministers against the government.As those close to Kyriakos Mitsotakis argue, comparing the two is inappropriate, both in terms of the substance of the criticism each leveled and the political motives behind it.
Behind this strategy lies the government’s aim to politically break up the duo of the two former prime ministers and prevent the impression that they represent a common front of dissent against the current leadership of the New Democracy party. Informed sources estimate that, despite specific disagreements, relations between the Maximos Mansion and Kostas Karamanlis could normalize by the next elections, at least to some extent.
This expectation is directly linked to the broader electoral strategy aimed at increasing party cohesion and re-engaging traditional center-right voters who currently find themselves in the so-called “gray zone.”
In the case of Antonis Samaras, the government attributes the constant attacks against Kyriakos Mitsotakis to “personal games and egos,” which, they believe, are also linked to scenarios regarding the creation of a new political entity.
“Citizens are interested in solutions, measurable results, and answers to their daily problems. The discussion about the possible transformation of a personal agenda, bitterness, or grievances does not interest the public,” Pavlos Marinakis emphasized yesterday, noting that the government should avoid getting entangled in a “meaningless feud” with those who seek to engage in politics without a clear and costed program.
New Democracy spokesperson Alexandra Sdoukou took a similar line, directly linking the former prime minister’s hardline stance to his, as she put it, “final decision” to proceed with the creation of a new political entity. She argued that Mr. Samaras’s criticism “goes beyond mere political disagreement and descends into more personal barbs and characterizations,” noting that “disagreement is one thing, but personal attacks are another.”
“Deeply partisan”
In contrast, at the Maximos Mansion, they choose to treat Kostas Karamanlis differently, whom they continue to characterize as a leading, historic figure in the party. The government spokesperson described the former prime minister as “one of the most iconic members of the New Democracy party,” emphasizing that both he and Kyriakos Mitsotakis are politicians who are “deeply committed to the party,” who put the country above all else and respect the party.
The government narrative seeks to highlight that Kostas Karamanlis’s criticism operates on a different level than that of Antonis Samaras. As Ms. Sdoukou noted, “I have never heard Mr. Karamanlis make personal remarks directed at the prime minister.” On the contrary, according to her, “he raises broader concerns regarding the functioning of the West, the rule of law, and the crisis of confidence in institutions—something that differs substantially from the harsh personal confrontation chosen by Mr. Samaras.”
In this context, government officials also reject the claims regarding the “expulsion” of Kostas Karamanlis from New Democracy, as Mr. Samaras has recently reiterated, citing their absence from the video shown at the party’s recent conference. Mr. Marinakis argued that the video in question was intended to highlight ordinary members and the party’s grassroots supporters, rather than to chart its historical trajectory through its top officials.