AUTHORITARIANISM in 20TH CENTURY GREECE Ideology and Education Under the Dictatorships of 1936 and 1967 Othon Evangelos Anastasa

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

AUTHORITARIANISM in 20TH CENTURY GREECE Ideology and Education Under the Dictatorships of 1936 and 1967 Othon Evangelos Anastasa AUTHORITARIANISM IN 20TH CENTURY GREECE Ideology and Education under the dictatorships of 1936 and 1967 Othon Evangelos Anastasakis Thesis submitted for PhD examination at the Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London. UMI Number: U062733 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U062733 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 F 6 922. ABSTRACT This study examines the authoritarian ideology and educational policy of two dictatorial regimes of 20th century Greece: the Metaxas’ dictatorship of 1936-1941 (the 4th of August regime); and the military junta of 1967-1974 (the 21st of April regime). Although viewed comparatively, the regimes in question are shown to have been different, due to crucial differences stemming from their contemporary international and domestic settings. Moreover, their ideologies were shaped by the way dictatorial rulers perceived and interpreted their reality. Influenced by the inter-war fascist context, the 4th of August regime tried to accommodate a radical fascist rhetoric to a nationalistic and traditionalist set of beliefs. Metaxas’ perception of reality was exemplified in his educational policy, through which the dictator unsuccessfully tried to mobilise from above the youth, on the imported model of the fascist youth movements. The 21st of April regime contrasted sharply with the post-war international liberal environment, while its ideology was marked by the distinct and often contradictory mentalities of the colonels. The contradictions and inconsistencies of the military mind were reproduced at the educational level, as the military rulers attempted to demobilise a highly organised youth, to reverse the previous liberal educational reforms and to appoint loyalists to key posts. So, while the 4th of August saw the legitimation of its authority in the use of an openly authoritarian discourse and the mobilisation of the youth, the 21st of April regime, by contrast, torn by the conflicting mentalities of its military rulers, sought legitimacy through clientelistic networks of support and the demobilisation of the youth. iii To my mother iv CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................... viii ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................................... ix INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1 The inter-war fascist context................................................................................................. 2 Function of the regime Fascism and monopoly capital.......................................................................3 Political domination Totalitarianism...........................................................................................................4 Social base Mobilisation of the middle classes ...........................................................................6 Fascism A complex phenomenon................................................................................. 6 Greek literature on the 4th of August regime ....................................................................... 10 A fascist regime..................................................................................................................... 11 A “quasi-fascist” regime .............................................................................................14 A reactionary regime.............................................................................................................. 15 Contradictions among the hegemonic forces .............................................................18 The post-war liberal context ................................................................................................ 18 The difference with the fascist context... ................................................................19 The exceptional state..............................................................................................................20 The Bureaucratic-Authoritarian model ..................................................................................22 Right-wing military rule........................................................................................................ 23 Greek literature on the 21st of April regime ............................................................ 24 A US satellite......................................................................................................................... 25 A neo-fascist dictatorship ..................................................................................................... 26 A military coup d’ etat........................................................................................................... 27 The two authoritarian cases compared ..................................................................................28 Authoritarian belief system Ideologies vs mentalities......................................................................................... 31 Authoritarian education of the youth Mobilisation vs demobilisation ................................................................................ 34 Chapter 1 IDEOLOGY AND EDUCATION IN A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE GREECE 1821-1922 .................................................................................. 38 The development of a state ideology in independent Greece...............................................38 Religion The State and the Church .............................................................................. 43 Language The problem of “diglossia” ......................................................................................46 History Interpretation of the Greek past ....................................................................47 Nationalism The “Megali Idea” and the territorial implications ...................................................49 The Development of state education in independent Greece ................................... 53 The Centralised, Classicist and “Democratic” Character of Greek Education ............... 54 Demands for reform The “demoticist” movement ............................................................................58 PART I: THE 4TH OF AUGUST REGIME.................................................... 62 Chapter 2 INTER-WAR PERIOD......................................................................................63 Background factors to the 4th of August regime ................................................................ 63 V A. The Inter-war Period Socio-political Crisis and the Quest for a New National Identity .....................65 B. Fascism in Greece A negligible influence ......................................................................................70 C. The power structure of the 4th of August regime A royal-supported personal dictatorship ........................................................ 76 D. The personality of the leader Inter-war ideological vacillations..............................................................................79 Chapter 3 THE 4TH OF AUGUST REGIME’S IDEAS OF THE INTER-WAR REALITY..................................................................................................................88 Anti-communism A conventional authoritarian theme ..........................................................................90 Anti-parliamentarism The fascist influence ................................................................................................. 92 Inter-war nationalism The aggressive fascist context..................................................................................94 Greek nationalism under the 4th of August regime A defensive perception .............................................................................................97 "Third Greek Civilisation” The Metaxist Megali Idea...............................................................................99 Religion The ambivalent institution in inter-war authoritarianism .................................104 The fascist New State Corporati st organisation............................................................................................ 106 The Greek model of the corporate state and class regulation A populist rhetoric and practice .....................................................................108 The Leadership principle in the Greek case A “phony” charisma ..................................................................................................112 Metaxas and Salazar Similar patterns of behaviour ....................................................................................114 Chapter 4 THE 4TH OF AUGUST REGIME’S EDUCATIONAL POLICY........................116 A. Ideological mobilisation of the youth .............................................................................
Recommended publications
  • CRITICAL THEORY and AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM Critical Theory and Authoritarian Populism
    CDSMS EDITED BY JEREMIAH MORELOCK CRITICAL THEORY AND AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM Critical Theory and Authoritarian Populism edited by Jeremiah Morelock Critical, Digital and Social Media Studies Series Editor: Christian Fuchs The peer-reviewed book series edited by Christian Fuchs publishes books that critically study the role of the internet and digital and social media in society. Titles analyse how power structures, digital capitalism, ideology and social struggles shape and are shaped by digital and social media. They use and develop critical theory discussing the political relevance and implications of studied topics. The series is a theoretical forum for in- ternet and social media research for books using methods and theories that challenge digital positivism; it also seeks to explore digital media ethics grounded in critical social theories and philosophy. Editorial Board Thomas Allmer, Mark Andrejevic, Miriyam Aouragh, Charles Brown, Eran Fisher, Peter Goodwin, Jonathan Hardy, Kylie Jarrett, Anastasia Kavada, Maria Michalis, Stefania Milan, Vincent Mosco, Jack Qiu, Jernej Amon Prodnik, Marisol Sandoval, Se- bastian Sevignani, Pieter Verdegem Published Critical Theory of Communication: New Readings of Lukács, Adorno, Marcuse, Honneth and Habermas in the Age of the Internet Christian Fuchs https://doi.org/10.16997/book1 Knowledge in the Age of Digital Capitalism: An Introduction to Cognitive Materialism Mariano Zukerfeld https://doi.org/10.16997/book3 Politicizing Digital Space: Theory, the Internet, and Renewing Democracy Trevor Garrison Smith https://doi.org/10.16997/book5 Capital, State, Empire: The New American Way of Digital Warfare Scott Timcke https://doi.org/10.16997/book6 The Spectacle 2.0: Reading Debord in the Context of Digital Capitalism Edited by Marco Briziarelli and Emiliana Armano https://doi.org/10.16997/book11 The Big Data Agenda: Data Ethics and Critical Data Studies Annika Richterich https://doi.org/10.16997/book14 Social Capital Online: Alienation and Accumulation Kane X.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global New Right and the Flemish Identitarian Movement Schild & Vrienden a Case Study
    Paper The global New Right and the Flemish identitarian movement Schild & Vrienden A case study by Ico Maly© (Tilburg University) [email protected] December 2018 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ The global New Right and the Flemish identitarian movement Schild & Vrienden. A case study. Ico Maly Abstract: This paper argues that nationalism, and nationalistic activism in particular are being globalized. At least certain fringes of radical nationalist activists are organized as ‘cellular systems’ connected and mobilize-able on a global scale giving birth to what I call ‘global nationalistic activism’. Given this change in nationalist activism, I claim that we should abandon all ‘methodological nationalism’. Methodological nationalism fails in arriving at a thorough understanding of the impact, scale and mobilization power (Tilly, 1974) of contemorary ‘national(istic)’ political activism. Even more, it inevitably will contribute to the naturalization or in emic terms the meta-political goals of global nationalist activists. The paradox is of course evident: global nationalism uses the scale- advantages, network effects and the benefits of cellular structures to fight for the (re)construction of the old 19th century vertebrate system par excellence: the (blood and soil) nation. Nevertheless, this, I will show, is an indisputable empirical reality: the many local nationalistic battles are more and more embedded in globally operating digital infrastructures mobilizing militants from all corners of the world for nationalist causes at home. Nationalist activism in the 21st century, so goes my argument, has important global dimensions which are easily repatriated for national use.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Thinking Fascism and Populism in Terms of the Past
    Introduction Thinking Fascism and Populism in Terms of the Past Representing a historian’s inquiry into how and why fascism morphed into populism in history, this book describes the dicta- torial genealogies of modern populism. It also stresses the sig- nifi cant diff erences between populism as a form of democracy and fascism as a form of dictatorship. It rethinks the conceptual and historical experiences of fascism and populism by assessing their elective ideological affi nities and substantial political dif- ferences in history and theory. A historical approach means not subordinating lived experiences to models or ideal types but rather stressing how the actors saw themselves in contexts that were both national and transnational. It means stressing varied contingencies and manifold sources. History combines evidence with interpretation. Ideal types ignore chronology and the cen- trality of historical processes. Historical knowledge requires accounting for how the past is experienced and explained through narratives of continuities and change over time. Against an idea of populism as an exclusively European or American phenomenon, I propose a global reading of its historical 1 2 / Introduction itineraries. Disputing generic theoretical defi nitions that reduce populism to a single sentence, I stress the need to return populism to history. Distinctive, and even opposed, forms of left- and right- wing populism crisscross the world, and I agree with historians like Eric Hobsbawm that left and right forms of populism cannot be confl ated simply because they are often antithetical.1 While populists on the left present those who are opposed to their politi- cal views as enemies of the people, populists on the right connect this populist intolerance of alternative political views with a con- ception of the people formed on the basis of ethnicity and country of origin.
    [Show full text]
  • Ireland and the End of the British Empire: the Republic and Its Role in the Cyprus Emergency
    Ireland and the End of the British Empire: The Republic and Its Role in the Cyprus Emergency HELEN O’SHEA I.B. Tauris (London, 2015), xviii and 288 pp. ISBN: 978-1-78076-752-9 In April 2004, in the weeks leading up to the referendum on the Annan Plan, numerous events were held across Cyprus to discuss the relative merits and, more usually, drawbacks of the proposals for the island’s reunification. One of these events, which took place in Nicosia, involved the then Irish Ambassador to Cyprus. Like many other European Union diplomats based on the island at the time, he openly supported the Plan. He therefore used the opportunity to call on people to vote ‘Yes’ in the forthcoming poll. At the end of his speech, a Greek Cypriot man got up from his seat and launched in to a full scale condemnation of the ambassador’s position. In doing so, he uttered an immortal line. In all seriousness, he asked the ambassador what he could possible know about conflict and division. The rest of the audience was left utterly dumbfounded. It simply defied belief that anyone could have made such a comment. Indeed, it was almost impossible to quite take in what had just been said. If anything, most Greek Cypriots were more than aware of the apparent commonalities shared by the two islands. Indeed, to most Greek Cypriots, it is almost as though the people of Cyprus and Ireland are spiritual kin. Against this backdrop, it is perhaps surprising that there has been remarkably little written on the relationship between Cyprus and Ireland.
    [Show full text]
  • Illiberalism Studies Program Working Papers
    ILLIBERALISM STUDIES PROGRAM WORKING PAPERS M A Y 2 0 2 1 An Identitarian Europe? Successes and Limits of the Diffusion of the French Identitarian Movement M A R I O N J A C Q U E T - V A I L L A N T An Identitarian Europe? Successes and Limits of the Diffusion of the French Identitarian Movement Marion Jacquet-Vaillant Illiberalism Studies Program Working Papers no. 7 May 2021 Photo Cover: “Generation-identitaire” by Pulek1 licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 ©IERES2021 The Identitarian Movement (IM) was born in France in 2002-2003, founded by Fabrice Robert, Guillaume Luyt, and Philippe Vardon in the weeks following the dissolution of the far-right group Unité radicale. Over the past 19 years, several associations have been involved in the French IM: Les Identitaires (LI) and the Bloc Identitaire (BI) have alternated as the “adult” organizations, while Les Jeunesses Identitaires (JI), Une Autre Jeunesse (UAJ), and Génération Identitaire (GI) have successively embodied its “youth” branch. Génération Identitaire (GI), founded in 2012, progressively became the figurehead of the IM before being administratively dissolved by the French government in March 2021. Since then, activists have been barred from carrying out any action in the name of Génération Identitaire. If the decision has not affected Les Identitaires or local associations (such as the Identitarian bars or cultural associations), it has thrown into jeopardy the GI brand they have successfully diffused throughout Europe. The French Identitarian movement1 claims an attachment to a certain civilizational identity linked to the European continent. In addition to structuring their movement into local chapters, each of which is responsible for the defense and promotion of local identities, the activists strive to embody this common European identity at the European level.2 They have, it seems, succeeded in doing so: since its creation, the French Identitarian movement has effectively maintained links with counterparts in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Ideology, Social Basis, Prospects REPORT 2018
    European Centre for Democracy Development Center for Monitoring and Comparative Analysis of Intercultural Communications CONTEMPORARY FAR-RIGHTS Right radicalism in Europe: ideology, social basis, prospects REPORT 2018 Athens-London-Berlin-Paris-Moscow-Krakow-Budapest-Kiev-Amsterdam-Roma 1 Editor in Chief and Project Head: Dr. Valery Engel, Chairman of the Expert Council of the European Centre for Tolerance, principal of the Center for Monitoring and Comparative Analysis of Intercultural Communications Authors: Dr. Valery Engel (general analytics), Dr. Jean-Yves Camus (France), Dr. Anna Castriota (Italy), Dr. Ildikó Barna (Hungary), Bulcsú Hunyadi (Hungary), Dr. Vanja Ljujic (Netherlands), Tika Pranvera (Greece), Katarzyna du Val (Poland), Dr. Semen Charny (Russia), Dr. Dmitry Stratievsky (Germany), Ruslan Bortnik (Ukraine), Dr. Alex Carter (UK) Authors thank the Chairman of the European Centre for Tolerance, Mr. Vladimir Sternfeld, for his financial support of the project CONTEMPORARY FAR-RIGHTS Right radicalism in Europe: ideology, social basis, prospects Report “Contemporary far-rights. Right-wing radicalism in Europe: ideology, social base, prospects" is the result of the work of an international team of experts from 10 European countries. The report answers the question of what is the social basis of European right- wing radicalism and what are the objective prerequisites and possible directions for its development. In addition, the authors answer the question of what stays behind the ideology of modern radicalism, what the sources of funding for right-wing radical organizations are, and who their leaders are. Significant part of information is introduced for the first time. © European Center for Democracy Development, 2018 © Center for Monitoring and Comparative Analysis of Intercultural Communications, 2018 © Institute for Ethnic Policy and Inter-Ethnic Relations Studies, 2018 2 Introduction Radicalism is a commitment to the extreme views and concepts of the social order associated with the possibility of its radical transformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Communism and Post-Communism in Romania : Challenges to Democratic Transition
    TITLE : COMMUNISM AND POST-COMMUNISM IN ROMANIA : CHALLENGES TO DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AUTHOR : VLADIMIR TISMANEANU, University of Marylan d THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FO R EURASIAN AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARC H TITLE VIII PROGRA M 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, N .W . Washington, D .C . 20036 LEGAL NOTICE The Government of the District of Columbia has certified an amendment of th e Articles of Incorporation of the National Council for Soviet and East European Research changing the name of the Corporation to THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR EURASIAN AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARCH, effective on June 9, 1997. Grants, contracts and all other legal engagements of and with the Corporation made unde r its former name are unaffected and remain in force unless/until modified in writin g by the parties thereto . PROJECT INFORMATION : 1 CONTRACTOR : University of Marylan d PR1NCIPAL 1NVEST1GATOR : Vladimir Tismanean u COUNCIL CONTRACT NUMBER : 81 1-2 3 DATE : March 26, 1998 COPYRIGHT INFORMATIO N Individual researchers retain the copyright on their work products derived from research funded by contract with the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research . However, the Council and the United States Government have the right to duplicate an d disseminate, in written and electronic form, this Report submitted to the Council under thi s Contract, as follows : Such dissemination may be made by the Council solely (a) for its ow n internal use, and (b) to the United States Government (1) for its own internal use ; (2) for further dissemination to domestic, international and foreign governments, entities an d individuals to serve official United States Government purposes ; and (3) for dissemination i n accordance with the Freedom of Information Act or other law or policy of the United State s Government granting the public rights of access to documents held by the United State s Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, II Author(S): Karl Loewenstein Source: the American Political Science Review, Vol
    Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, II Author(s): Karl Loewenstein Source: The American Political Science Review, Vol. 31, No. 4 (Aug., 1937), pp. 638-658 Published by: American Political Science Association Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1948103 Accessed: 07-08-2018 08:47 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Political Science Review This content downloaded from 35.176.47.6 on Tue, 07 Aug 2018 08:47:36 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms MILITANT DEMOCRACY AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, II* KARL LOEWENSTEIN Amherst College II Some Illustrations of Militant Democracy. Before a more system- atic -account of anti-fascist legislation in Europe is undertaken, recent developments in several countries may be reviewed as illus- trating what militant democracy can achieve against subversive extremism when the will to survive is coupled with appropriate measures for combatting fascist techniques. 1. Finland: From the start, the Finnish Republic was particu- larly exposed to radicalism both from left and right. The newly established state was wholly devoid of previous experience in self- government, shaken by violent nationalism, bordered by bolshevik Russia, yet within the orbit of German imperialism; no other country seemed more predestined to go fascist.
    [Show full text]
  • Carol Migdalovitz Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Defense Division
    Order Code RS21855 Updated October 16, 2007 Greece Update Carol Migdalovitz Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Defense Division Summary The conservative New Democracy party won reelection in September 2007. Kostas Karamanlis, its leader, remained prime minister and pledged to continue free-market economic reforms to enhance growth and create jobs. The government’s foreign policy focuses on the European Union (EU), relations with Turkey, reunifying Cyprus, resolving a dispute with Macedonia over its name, other Balkan issues, and relations with the United States. Greece has assisted with the war on terrorism, but is not a member of the coalition in Iraq. This report will be updated if developments warrant. See also CRS Report RL33497, Cyprus: Status of U.N. Negotiations and Related Issues, by Carol Migdalovitz. Government and Politics Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis called for early parliamentary elections to be held on September 16, 2007, instead of in March 2008 as otherwise scheduled, believing that his government’s economic record would ensure easy reelection. In August, however, Greece experienced severe and widespread wildfires, resulting in 76 deaths and 270,000 hectares burned. The government attempted to deflect attention from what was widely viewed as its ineffective performance in combating the fires by blaming the catastrophe on terrorists, without proof, and by providing generous compensation for victims. This crisis came on top of a scandal over the state pension fund’s purchase of government bonds at inflated prices. Under these circumstances, Karamanlis’s New Democracy party’s (ND) ability to win of a slim majority of 152 seats in the unicameral 300-seat parliament and four more years in office was viewed as a victory.
    [Show full text]
  • 0714685003.Pdf
    CONTENTS Foreword xi Acknowledgements xiv Acronyms xviii Introduction 1 1 A terrorist attack in Italy 3 2 A scandal shocks Western Europe 15 3 The silence of NATO, CIA and MI6 25 4 The secret war in Great Britain 38 5 The secret war in the United States 51 6 The secret war in Italy 63 7 The secret war in France 84 8 The secret war in Spain 103 9 The secret war in Portugal 114 10 The secret war in Belgium 125 11 The secret war in the Netherlands 148 12 The secret war in Luxemburg 165 ix 13 The secret war in Denmark 168 14 The secret war in Norway 176 15 The secret war in Germany 189 16 The secret war in Greece 212 17 The secret war in Turkey 224 Conclusion 245 Chronology 250 Notes 259 Select bibliography 301 Index 303 x FOREWORD At the height of the Cold War there was effectively a front line in Europe. Winston Churchill once called it the Iron Curtain and said it ran from Szczecin on the Baltic Sea to Trieste on the Adriatic Sea. Both sides deployed military power along this line in the expectation of a major combat. The Western European powers created the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) precisely to fight that expected war but the strength they could marshal remained limited. The Soviet Union, and after the mid-1950s the Soviet Bloc, consistently had greater numbers of troops, tanks, planes, guns, and other equipment. This is not the place to pull apart analyses of the military balance, to dissect issues of quantitative versus qualitative, or rigid versus flexible tactics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gordian Knot: American and British Policy Concerning the Cyprus Issue: 1952-1974
    THE GORDIAN KNOT: AMERICAN AND BRITISH POLICY CONCERNING THE CYPRUS ISSUE: 1952-1974 Michael M. Carver A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of The requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May 2006 Committee: Dr. Douglas J. Forsyth, Advisor Dr. Gary R. Hess ii ABSTRACT Douglas J. Forsyth, Advisor This study examines the role of both the United States and Great Britain during a series of crises that plagued Cyprus from the mid 1950s until the 1974 invasion by Turkey that led to the takeover of approximately one-third of the island and its partition. Initially an ancient Greek colony, Cyprus was conquered by the Ottoman Empire in the late 16th century, which allowed the native peoples to take part in the island’s governance. But the idea of Cyprus’ reunification with the Greek mainland, known as enosis, remained a significant tenet to most Greek-Cypriots. The movement to make enosis a reality gained strength following the island’s occupation in 1878 by Great Britain. Cyprus was integrated into the British imperialist agenda until the end of the Second World War when American and Soviet hegemony supplanted European colonialism. Beginning in 1955, Cyprus became a battleground between British officials and terrorists of the pro-enosis EOKA group until 1959 when the independence of Cyprus was negotiated between Britain and the governments of Greece and Turkey. The United States remained largely absent during this period, but during the 1960s and 1970s came to play an increasingly assertive role whenever intercommunal fighting between the Greek and Turkish-Cypriot populations threatened to spill over into Greece and Turkey, and endanger the southeastern flank of NATO.
    [Show full text]
  • The “Greek Case” in the Council of Europe: a Game Changer for International Law and Human Rights?
    designed by OMBLOS Supported by the Street 30 Panepistimiou University of Athens Alkis Argyriadis Amphitheatre 2019 12–14 December UNDER THE AUSPICES OF H.E. THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC MR. PROKOPIOS PAVLOPOULOS International Conference The “Greek Case” in the Council of Europe: A Game Changer for International Law and Human Rights? 12–14 December 2019 Alkis Argyriadis Amphitheatre, University of Athens Supported by the Thursday, 12 December 2019 Friday, 13 December 2019 Saturday, 14 December 2019 (limited seats available due to invited guests) 09:30–10:30 Session 1: The Applicant States, the “Greek 9:00–11:00 Session 4: International Institutions, 16:30 Registration Case”, and Global Anti-Torture Politics Solidarity Movements, and the “Greek Case” 17:00–17:30 Welcome Chair-Discussant: Axel Sotiris Walldén (Free University of Chair-Discussant: Hara Kouki (University of Durham) Willem Ledeboer (Netherlands Institute at Athens) Brussels, former official at the European Commission) Tom Buchanan (University of Oxford) On behalf of the Organizing Committee Hanne Hagtvedt Vik (University of Oslo) & Skage Alexander Amnesty International and the Greek Crisis of 1967–68 H.E. the Ambassador of Sweden, Charlotte Sammelin Østberg (University of Oslo) Kim Christiaens (University of Leuven): International Solidarity Global Anti-Torture Politics 1967–77 and the Scandinavian States with Greece in International Perspective H.E. the Ambassador of Denmark, Klavs A. Holm Wiebe Hommes (Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Janis Nalbadidacis (Humboldt University, Berlin) The “Greek Case” from Inside H.E. the Ambassador of the Netherlands, Stella Ronner-Grubacic Governance) č ć The Greek Case & the Netherlands: a Watershed Moment Konstantina Maragkou (London School of Economics) H.E.
    [Show full text]