From: gd8f@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Gregory  Dandulakis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek
Subject: Re: Greece and the EC (Lambros)
Date: 7 Jan 93 19:31:04 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

In article   writes:
>From: gavrila@imhfhp16.epfl.ch (Spyros Gavrilakis)
>Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek
>Subject: Re: Greece and the EC (Lambros)
>Message-ID: <1993Jan7.124520@imhfhp16.epfl.ch>
>Date: 7 Jan 93 11:45:20 GMT
>References: <1993Jan1.071804.17460@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1993Jan5.170542@imhfhp16.epfl.ch> <1993Jan5.231402.27474@wuecl.wustl.edu>
>Sender: news@sicsun.epfl.ch
>Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
>Lines: 28
>
>
>>>No. Only sentimental ones.
>          -----------
>>I sure hope you are kidding there Spyro.
>
>What else could it be?  What would the richer 9 EC countries want
>from Greece.


Now Spyros you are coming to a more reasonable approach. Since the
mass media from GB (etc) didn't offer us any other explanation,
we have to accept theirs? I choose not to.

Particularly from GB which was the main reason for the worst disasters
into 20th century Greece: the two big internal divisions (Royalists-
Venizelists, Communists-Republicans). If this sounds too far fetched
look at the historical accounts (and throw away the "political propaganda").

1916-1918: The British (and French) naval blockade and relentless bombardments
of Athens (with thousands of human losses), brought the abdication of the
King, Greece's enter by force into WWI, and the worst of all, connected
the split of Royalists vs. Venizelists with the brothers' blood. Consequence?
1918-1936 Greece's terrible internal situation. And the 1922 disaster was
the direct result of the WWI winners denial to enforce what they had given to
Greece in the Paris conference after WWI (Smyrna) as compensation of Venizelos
entrence of Greece into their side.

1940-1944: British huge financial and arms support towards the Communists
(as the most efficient "managers" of clandestine resistance because of
previous expertise; the same in Italy and France) anti-German activities,
(the British had created a special ministry to coordinate the financing
and information collection of all querrila efforts in the German-controlled
Europe) gave permission to the tremendous increase of the communist
influence in Greece from less than 5% before WWII to the incredible
more than 50% after it, plus the communists controlled the only organized
army (British armed) in Greece (EAM). All this change in Greece came because
of the British Money and Arms, plus the British induced starvation of the
population (naval blockade didn't permit the 40% imported foodstaffs in
1939 to reach the "somali-like" population) pushed masses of Greeks to
become communist organized querrila and to destroy (happily...) all the
existing greek infrastructure (industries, transportation and communication
links). After the end of the German control of Greece, the British (later
Americans) had to get rid of the communist (i.e. Russian) influence, which
they them selves had fuelled and supported. The question was:  BUT HOW?
(1) When the population was more than 50% supportive of them (any democratic
procedure would bring them in power)? (2) When the only army in Greece (EAM) 
was controlled by them? (3) When more than 50% of the remnants of Greek army
in N. Africa was anti-Royalit? Consequences: The greek army in N.Africa
was dessimated (3,000 officers and soldiers were purged in early 1944 and
died in concentration camps in Libya and Ethiopia). The British controlled
King was enforced into Greece by violence (2 years of terror tactics
brought only 45% of the people to vote in 1946, out of which 95% for him;
the rest of the population preferred to follow the communist party insist
to avoid voting for this british-controlled elections). "Prime Ministers"
were chosen every three months by the British; it was a total ridicule;
between them, of course, the most anti-communist G. Papandreou) and finally
the army-cancer (EAM) was brought into dissolution after massive US support
(British had already given up in money terms) of the royalist newly created
army. Result: Whatever greek infrastructure, the mostly pro-communist quer-
rila, had failed to destroy during the 1940-1944 period, then both of the
fighting armies did during the "civil" war (1946-1949).

After all this "good" behavior by the British towards Greece (which actually
starts since 1856 bombardments of Athens to avoid Greece join Russia into
the Crimaian war such as to liberate Macedonia), do you think that our
acceptance into the EC was "sentimental" ???!!!  NO, NO WAY. ONLY geopolitics
and geoeconomics made our way there. And if the timing was not the best, this
was related to Greece (not to EC), if it could survive the free competition
from the EC companies (not because the EC would lose one single dime).


Gr

PS: I know that by presenting FACTS about modern Greece's history as
    realistic as possible, can give the impression of cynicism or
    suspicion, because our parents and grandparents were used as pawns
    for others interests, and the worst of all, they fought and were
    killed while they were believing into their cause (fed propaganda
    from all sides). I had to come here, to check the accounts from
    the British and Americans officials at that time, offered for study
    to their new generation of diplomats in school, to see the level
    of missinformation (or no information) about history which the greeks
    are fed from their politicians. May be it's the only way to forget
    the nightmares and to work for a luckier (yes Luck; that's what you
    need when you are in the eye of competing powers) future. But the
    attitude to blame all of the country's drawbacks onto us is equally
    wrong as the attitude that all of our inefficiencies are because of 
    40 years ago (or even 20) foreign induced disasters. Both, bad luck
    and our bad habbits contribute to our second rate performance.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.greek:12119 soc.culture.turkish:14015