DN Note: Our collective presents and translates a text written by ‘Assembly against Biopower and Confinement’ detailing a Greek academic who is in alliance with the Greek state, cops and their counter-insurgency tactics against our comrades and any manfestation against the social order. A similar incident in this country of ‘Aufhebengate/Libcom‘ comes to mind when we post this text, how the parasites of academia and its involvement in counter-insurgency, has not only spread to other countries such as Greece, that there is also international co-operation occuring on a far larger scale than before. As seen by the text there is a move to include all theories that are deemed ‘extremist’ and ‘terrorist’ as one emcomapssing threat especially because of their use of violence. Academia is the breeding ground of the new technoligcal shift that has already arrived, collabaration with cops in order to repress our circles is unforgivable and anyone connected to such scum as Rosa Vasilaki are not our comrades.
POPULATION GOVERNANCE THROUGH THE STRATEGIC THEORY OF TWO OR MORE EXTREMES: THE CONTRIBUTION OF LEFTISTS AND ‘ANTI-AUTHORITARIANS’ TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS STATE STRATEGY
or
Do we all hate the police? Not all of us…
(on the occasion of the Event-Discussion in Chamadou entitled “The New World Order of the Far Right” by Asymmetric Threat & Opposition Publications)
“I decided to make an international career as a civilian, because Greece doesn’t fit me. Here is my article on the electoral rise of the far-right, hosted by Jakobin…
(Actually, the truth is that without Rosa Vasilaki’s invaluable help I wouldn’t even have made it to Bitola…)”[1]
Nikolai Polykarpov
One year ago, on 13/12/2022, the “Left-Right Lies Observatory”[2] publishes a video with an interview of former Contra Dystopia member Iason Baggeris on the show of the anti-vaccine cop Telemachus Bossios. We all believed at the time that the denunciation of I. B. by the meth/vaccine activists/vaccinators of the Observatory was done in the name of an anti-authoritarian authority: “we never talk to cops and cops’ associates”. The refutation of this erroneous initial impression was not long in coming. A few months later, on 28 August 2023, the main contributor to the Observatory, Polykarpos Georgiadis (Nikolai Polykarpov), published an article on the “coalescence of left and far-right in Greece” in Jacobin, the magazine of the left wing of the ruling Democratic Party in the US. [3] The publication of the article, as he informed his petty followers in a public post on his online profile, was mediated by Ms. Roza Vasilaki, among other “academic ” collaborators of the Greek Police – the latter of course conveniently for him avoided mentioning it. What happened in the meantime? Did Mr Georgiadis renounce his principles in order to make a face to the American democratic readers of Jacobin? No! As we will show in the following text, these “principles” are simply non-existent. But we will not limit ourselves to that. Because the issue for us is not simply the morally unacceptable or inconsistent behaviour of “anti-authoritarian” or “communist”, but the size and depth of the network of surveillance and repression of “dangerous” political activities that the security mechanisms have set up in Greece. And we will start by first answering the question: well, the “prominent member” of the Class Counterattack, Polikarpos is well-known, but who is Ms. Vassilaki?
Ι. TO WORK OR NOT TO WORK (FOR THE POLICE)?
In broad strokes, R.V. is another career researcher among those who use the language of the state and social movements simultaneously and have knowledge gained from participating in research projects that are at the service of capital, its state and the mechanisms of disciplining labour power and repressing class struggles. As such, it has acquired the capacity to be marketed differently depending on the audience. These days she tends to present herself as a militant researcher of the emergence of far-right discourse in Greece, as she writes in the promotional bio on her personal blog: ‘she has conducted extensive research on the far-right, football violence, religious fundamentalism, immigration and refugee integration, as well as feminism and gender-related issues.’[4]
By this point, one might reasonably wonder where the real problem lies. From the quotation of this autobiography, we seem to be talking about a left-wing researcher, one of many in the academic industry, who is conducting in-depth scholarly research on important issues that inevitably have occupied almost all social movements in recent years. Is there something wrong with all this and with Mr Georgiadis’ collaboration with R.V.? Are we referring to the classic combinations of academics of the antagonistic movement with other “networked” members of the academic community which can provide them with a few extra contacts and some professional and political career opportunities? Are we not referring to the various theoretical all-encompassing “conflict politics workshops”, from which indeed some careerists may later end up in the practical conflict politics workshops of the security apparatus of the capitalist state?
I wish we were just talking about this early stage of a political scientist’s career. In a more explicit, previously posted biography of R.V. on the internet, we read that “she has taught history and sociology at universities in Greece, Israel, and the United States. : we have the feeling that she did not teach anything that glorified the ‘Palestinian resistance’] and in Great Britain” and that her “main research interests focus on the changing place of religion in modernity, the emergence of post-secular and post-Western knowledge and theories, and the manifestations and genealogy of violence in the modern world, such as religiously and politically motivated violence and the particular role of security forces in modern states”. [5] Indeed, her professional activities cover a very broad field that basically centres around counter-insurgency policies and technologies, intelligence gathering and methods of preventing and suppressing activities ranging from youth rebellions to Islamist terrorism.
One of her first major achievements as a member of the cop intelligentsia that has emerged in Greece in recent years is the publication of the amazing article “Policing the Crisis in Greece: the Others’ Side of the Story.”[6] In this piece she describes the crisis period in Greece through the eyes and experiences of the cops. She refers to the “stigmatization” of these “workers”, the “monolithicity” and “stereotypicality” with which people see the cops, how she interviewed about 90 or so of them, how she spent 17 months ethnographing them, how she followed MAT platoons at work twice (November 17, 2014 and April 2015 when Syriza started attacking some squats)[7] and how she came to… feel them! But let us pause and let her speak about her work:
“My intention, too, was not only to shed light on the experience of the police officers, but also to do so with the consistency, care and the necessary time that a research study requires. In terms of the objective, I hope that the research will be able to highlight both the problematic aspects of police experience and practice, and to contribute to the formulation and implementation of proposals and solutions acceptable to both the police and society. I also hope that my research will justify the trust placed in me by the police officers, to whom I am grateful, each and every one of them, for their support. […]
The lack of systematic research on the Police in Greece is, unfortunately, particularly noticeable in our country. The Police has so far been the subject of study indirectly or supplementarily. By this I mean that the Police is examined in our country in the context of criminology, or even legal science, but rarely as an independent subject that produces knowledge for the needs of our Police, our society, and the problems to which the Greek police officer is called upon to respond. I therefore believe that the creation and operation of an Institute of Police Studies would be an extremely important step in this direction. Such an institute could bring police officers and academics into creative contact and thus constitute a unique innovation for the country”.
Basically, the whole research of R.V. wants to highlight three main problems of the MAT[8]:
1. That there are not enough of them and that those who do exist are not working with proper personal protection measures (something that reminds us of the state and union management of the pandemic).
2. That people are getting on their case a lot because of the incidents of real or staged (sic!) police brutality.
3. That they are not adequately trained and educated to effectively prevent future riots.
In order to realize and publish this work, R.V. went through a myriad of stages, since personal ambition is not enough to achieve something like this, first of all you have to have the right connections. As she informs us, she secured her access to the cops through the editor of the notorious cop blog bloko.gr and the various contacts she had made with the cops at a “workshop on riots” in 2014. As curious readers of her research, we searched for more details and found out that it was a seminar entitled “Why do people riot? Causes, Realities, Ways of Management”, organised by the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP), in Athens, from 5 to 9 May 2014. [9] Participants[10] had the unique opportunity on May 5 (you guessed it, the date was chosen randomly for the event) to enjoy in turn: the then mayor of Athens Giorgos Kaminis analyzing the “riots” from the point of view of local government, Rosa Vasilaki explaining how the “rioters” think and feel, and after a break with a relaxing coffee and a view of the Acropolis, the then minister of public security. Nikos Dendias analysing the Greek government’s perspective. Good thing at least, this particular group of people have been found to be (in words and deeds) anti-fascist.
Three years later, having managed to get her feet firmly planted in the cop intelligentsia, as a research associate of ELIAMEP,[11] she participates in the two-day conference entitled “Lessons from efforts to prevent radicalisation”[12] organised by ELIAMEP and the Konrad-Adenauer Foundation (KAS) office in Greece, with the support of the Australian, Canadian and Dutch Embassies. As we read in the press release:
“The Workshop was attended by experts and officials involved in integration and radicalisation prevention policies from various European countries, but also from Australia, Canada, Israel, as well as experts from Europol, Interpol, RAN and the European Commission. The main objective of the Workshop, to start a process of training Greek officials on radicalisation prevention strategies and policies, was successfully achieved”. The list of participants, which includes the elites of the security state and the anti-terrorist cop complex, included Israeli ambassadors, chief batsmen, cyprisers, mayors, Professor Mary Bossi and other scumbags, but fortunately for all of us there must have been very few right-wing extremists.[13]
In February 2018, at a workshop of the Centre for Security Studies (KE.ME.A),[14] the predominant domestic security think tank operating under the supervision of the Ministry of Defence, entitled “Actions to prevent radicalisation leading to violent extremism in Greece”, she presented the ELIAMEP programme entitled RAD MONITOR, in which she participated. But what is the value of this project and of the prevention of radicalisation in general for the cop/plainclothes cop network and for the capitalist states it protects?
II. THE THEORY OF RADICALISATION: A TOOL FOR POLICING BEHAVIOUR AND COUNTER-INSURGENCY
It is clear that Ms. Vasilaki’s views and practices do not originate from a personal vice, a purely personal love for the police who are being targeted by the “extremists” operating within society. The democratisation of the police and the adoption of a social profile by the latter is her job. Vasilaki, as we have said, works within a network of scientific police advisers who guide her to do her job ‘properly’: that of guarding the bourgeois-commercial-exploitative order and repressing those who threaten it, wherever they come from. For many years – in Britain, Israel, Greece – she has worked within EU-funded security and counter-insurgency research programmes known as programmes for the analysis of ‘radicalisation’, ‘extremism’ and ‘terrorism’ (a term that, not coincidentally, never refers to terrorist states), which include sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, criminologists, security and political analysts. The aim of these programmes is purely political: they draw up guidelines for preventive/suppressive policy-making and are aimed at ‘frontline professionals’.
To understand the theory of radicalisation as a tool inextricably linked to law and order enforcement practices, let us see what she and her other colleagues from KEMEA and ELIAMEP have written about radicalisation, starting with the latter:
“The intensity and nature of political violence in Greece, as well as the forms it takes, have evolved over time. Levels of political violence emanating from far-left groups have remained high in Greece. Indeed, they increased from the 1970s to 2000, as the data on the number of attacks from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) show. The GTD records 1169 violent incidents originating from the far left between February 1973 and December 2014 in Greece. The number of incidents has increased in specific years and time periods, such as 1977-78, 1989-90 and to a lesser extent between 1989-99, peaking in 2008.
Extremism and violence from the far right have also increased rapidly since 2010 both locally and nationally, whereas before 2010 they were less visible and possibly more limited. […] Central to this process of increasing far-right radicalisation and violence has been the rise of the political party Golden Dawn (Χρυσής Αυγής). XA played a pivotal role both in the concentration and expression of a widespread – but long latent – extremist attitude towards immigrants, and in its dissemination in the context of a racist nationalism based on national-socialist ideas. […]
Youth are more prone to extremism and radicalisation on the far right (and the same is true on the far left). In the case of the far right, it is often young people from the lower socio-economic strata, and from the areas most affected by the economic crisis. The main spaces where the processes of far-right radicalisation take place are schools, neighbourhoods (especially in the areas of Athens where the XA is strong and dominant), residents’ committees, and the party structures of the XA. A large proportion of XA supporters either accept or tolerate as legitimate or necessary the violence perpetrated by party-affiliated groups, as shown by the consistently high levels of electoral support for XA, even after the party leadership was prosecuted for forming a criminal organisation. […]
Moreover, the ideologies of the far right and anarchism, as well as organised crime, have visibly penetrated the sports arenas. This has created a ‘system of communicating vessels’ between organised and hard-core fan associations and extremism. […]
The RAD MONITOR project studied the phenomenon of radicalisation in the countries of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, including Greece. […]
In designing appropriate strategies to manage the factors contributing to extremism and violent radicalisation, policy makers and government agencies face significant challenges. There is a clear need for evidence-based knowledge generation on this issue as a solid basis for the formulation of appropriate and effective policies and methods for both preventing and countering radicalisation. […]
Within the RAD MONITOR project, the Greek case study investigated and presented the basic characteristics and repertoire of actions of the four different forms of radicalisation: that associated with the extreme left and its continuity in the wider anti-authoritarian space; that associated with the extreme right and closely linked to the rise of the Golden Dawn (‘XA’); religiously motivated radicalisation associated with Islam; and so-called ‘hooliganism’ and violence in the field of sport, especially football. There is no doubt that these are completely different phenomena, which one might wonder why we are studying them in parallel. We do not believe for any reason that we can equate these four forms, which are completely different from each other. Nor do we believe that any of them feed off each other.
Our report on the case of Greece firstly examines the legal, institutional and policy framework and mechanisms for dealing with and preventing radicalisation that can lead to violent actions and acts. It provides an overview of the four trends of radicalisation, both past and present (in terms of threats and identification of vulnerable groups, the ways in which they manifest themselves, and how to address them at the institutional level). It describes their main characteristics, their ideas and ideology, their organisational structures and actors, as well as the motivations and causes leading to radicalisation in each of the four forms under consideration. Our study attempts to shed light on the evidence and risk factors, contributing to the knowledge base for the design and piloting of a tool for monitoring radicalisation.
The second objective of RAD MONITOR is to develop a tool for identifying and monitoring radicalisation processes, aimed at frontline professionals.
The Radicalisation Monitoring Tool (RMT) is based on the formulation of a series of indicators that reveal trends and phenomena that pose a risk of radicalisation. The indicators refer to either behaviours or phenomena captured through data collection. The purpose of the indicators is to act as a “bellwether” to identify individuals and groups that are prone to the risk of radicalisation, or are in a process of crystallising their motivations or organising their involvement in acts of violence. […]
In the context of the research we carried out in the RAD MONITOR project, we do not agree with the “two extremes theory”. We do not believe that the far left and the far right can be equated, nor do we believe that they feed off each other. In principle, the “extremes” are not two, they are more. The resort to violence as a form of social protest or political expression may invoke a variety of ideological-religious beliefs and moral principles in order to gain legitimacy and some acceptance in public opinion. However, what the four forms of radicalisation we have examined in this research project have in common is a propensity towards violence: the use of violence as a tool, as a mode of expression, or as a means of intimidation and pressure to achieve specific goals.
In a broad sense, radicalisation can be understood as “the process by which individuals are led to adopt radical views of the status quo”. Radicalisation is characterised by ‘a growing willingness to seek and support radical changes in society that either break with or directly threaten the status quo’. Individuals and groups adopting this attitude embrace ‘polarising and absolute definitions of a given situation [and advocate] increasingly ‘radical’ goals and objective pursuits’. Under certain circumstances, the adoption of radical ideas can translate into a willingness to support or participate in violent actions. Radicalisation is a dynamic, multilevel and multifaceted phenomenon. It manifests itself as a result, firstly, of interaction between individuals who are vulnerable or prone to radical ideas, and secondly, of the existence of a conducive environment that can create opportunities to organise and participate in armed groups. […]
[The] Greek Police has the ability to produce some basic indicators of radicalisation, which are contained in the Radicalisation Monitoring Tool that we developed in the framework of the RAD MONITOR project. These indicators that the police can produce are the “Frequency of suspected hate crimes”, the ” Frequency of suspected hate crimes in violent criminal activity”, and the ” Frequency of suspected hate crimes in total criminal activity”. […]
The Hellenic Police is not able to produce the indicators “Total number of notable events with extreme right-wing extremist connotations”, “Participation in notable events with extreme right-wing extremist connotations”, ‘Notable events with extreme right-wing extremist connotations by type’, and ‘Violent behaviour during notable events with extreme right-wing extremist connotations’, due to lack of relevant data. In this respect, the Greek Police could try to increase its capacity to collect data on far-right events, as, quite often, such events become a precursor to racist attacks.”[15]
In addition to the above, the third member of the Greek section of RAD MONITOR tells us:
“A common feature of extremism and the process of radicalisation to which the members of these groups are subjected in order to possibly carry out terrorist acts, is the violent adaptation of the world to the model they envision. In this perspective, the means are of little importance in the face of achieving the goal of the ‘ideal society’. Society is presented as ‘corrupt’ or ‘alienated’, as ‘drifting’ into a way of life that runs counter to the ideals of the extremist ideology in question, and the terrorist group is presented as the ‘self-appointed saviour’ of a misguided world. There are of course substantial differences in the different extremist ideologies and the narratives they offer, but their tendency to violently adapt reality to the ideal, their lack of respect for human life or their view of it as a collateral, minor loss, places them in a common category, that of violent extremism. […] Radicalisation is an individual process, but scholars of the phenomenon stress the importance of networks and social contacts that essentially introduce the individual to this process. The existence of ‘lone wolves’, which is mainly – but not exclusively – associated with far-right terrorism, does not diminish the importance of the group and networks, face-to-face or virtual via the Internet, in creating conditions for radicalisation.”[16]
The Anagnostou/Skleparis/Vassilakis team presented their positions and proposals for repressive action at the 2018 cop conference that we mentioned in the first part:
“The Centre for Security Studies [KEMEA], in cooperation with the Institute of Criminology of the University of Lower Saxony, organised with great success, in the framework of the European project PERICLES – Policy Recommendation and Improved Communication Tools for Law Enforcement and Security Agencies Preventing Radicalisation, on 22 February 2018, the workshop on: “Actions to Prevent Radicalisation Leading to Violent Extremism in Greece”. More than 100 participants from Law Enforcement Agencies (Hellenic Police, General Secretariat of Anticrime Policy, Coast Guard, Customs), the Public Sector (Ministry of Immigration Policy, Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs, Ministry of Health, etc.), Local Authorities, as well as Civil Society and the academic community took part in the workshop. […]
The second panel, moderated by the Director of KE.ME.A, Ioannis Tafyllis, concerned the participation of Greek institutions in research projects related to the phenomenon of violent radicalisation. Professor of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Lazaros Merakos, Assistant Professor of the University of Piraeus Konstantinos Patsakis, ELIAMEP Scientific Associate Dr. Rosa Vasilaki and the Representative of Eurotec S. A. Dimitrios Rossakis presented respectively the YCARE, PRACTICIES, RAD MONITOR and LIAISE II Programmes, while the Scientific Associate of KE.ME.A. Triantafyllos Karatrantos presented the research activities of KE.ME.A.”[17]
From the study of the research activities of state, quasi-state and private security agencies (we have studied many more documents than those mentioned above), some initial conclusions can be drawn:
1. The security services target not only actual acts of violence against institutions and persons, but all ideas that might lead to “radical changes in society” and “directly threaten the existing order”. The promoters of these ideas are monitored on a scale that embraces almost the whole of society (from right-wing, left-wing, anarchist groups to Muslim communities and organised fan associations).
2. The term “alleged hate crimes” targets the class struggle itself and social movements in general, since “class hatred” often leads to violent occupations of public or private buildings, wildcat strikes, attacks on bosses, attacks on hospital administrators imposing compulsory vaccination, etc. With regard to this, especially, side of preventive repression, recent labour jurisprudence is typical as it prohibits any act that may prevent strike-breaking, even (purely expletive) swearing.
3. The delusional discourse of these research projects does, however, produce a ‘discourse of truth’: the capitalist state, as its political form of expression is consolidated in positions of the so-called ‘extreme centre’, feels threatened from everywhere, by right-wing, left-wing, anarchist, hooligan and Islamic revolts. Even by the idea that the society we live in is ‘alienated’!
4. The far-right’s “dealing with racist hate crimes” is the democratic-humanist foil that justifies the imposition of a generalised control over a society that is supposed to be massively inclined towards crime.
5. Suspicion of the “lower socio-economic strata” is pervasive in these documents. The state seems to understand perfectly well who the ‘enemy within’ is.
6. The list of targets (judging by what is mentioned in other “analyses” of radicalisation) seems to be inexhaustible: recently added to it are “conspiracy thinking”, anti-vaccinationists, groups with ideas about animal rights, etc. Anyone, therefore, who goes against the dominant narrative of capitalist power at any given time.
7. Radicalisation theory is the strategic theory of two extremes that has been upgraded to the theory of many extremes – “communicating vessels” that threaten the status quo.
III. THE LEFT-RIGHT LIE OBSERVATORY AND ITS CONTRIBUTION TO THE THEORY OF (TWO OR MORE) DANGEROUS FRONTS FOR DEMOCRACY
“I have said it before, no one undermines the current far right and its infiltration into other political spaces in the comprehensive and sharp way that Polikarpos Georgiadis does.”[18]
Rosa Vasilaki
It is obvious that Ms Vasilaki’s interest in Mr Georgiadis does not stem from the fact that he is a pretty boy. Being irrelevant to the anti-authoritarian space, Rosa took the opportunity to do a new ethnographic research through Nikolai (Asymmetric Threat) and Egelidis (Opposition) – this time on the other side, inside the Lower Rectory and any other occupation of April 2015. And she doesn’t hide her joy – as her public statements show – at the fact that she has discovered the “rational anti-authoritarians” who can “prove” (we’re talking now…) that far left and far right “feed each other” through “conspiracy thinking” and other “extreme” concepts (hence the countless likes between this trio on social media).
This confirms what Anagnostou/Skleparis wrote in their aforementioned security book: “the ELIAMEP team was asked [among other things] to identify data which are not collected by the competent bodies”.
Assembly against Biopower and Confinement
7/12/2023
[All of the links that lead to an error open when copy and paste is done]
[1]https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0pim3H9ypGsJaGpsaaDcKek65d4hUGLDMBPYtbpYrkBiKUR3asuYarkEZNoMY55yal&id=100078934484106
[2] For more on this wretched socialist construct, see here: https://againstbiopowerandconfinement.noblogs.org/post/2023/04/23/2_anarxostalines_ya_tin_taxiki_pali/
[3] In Greece, Social Despair Is Helping the Rise of Fascist Conspiracy Theorists, by Polykarpos Georgiadis: https://jacobin.com/2023/08/greece-elections-far-right-conspiracy-theories-covid
[4] https://www.rosavasilaki.com/about
[5] https://www.eliamep.gr/en/members/%CE%B4%CF%81-%CF%81%CF%8C%CE%B6%CE%B1-%CE%B2%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B9%CE%BB%CE%AC%CE%BA%CE%B7-%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B5%CF%85%CE%BD%CE%AE%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B1 / [opens only with copy-paste]
[6] Vasilaki, Rosa, Policing the Crisis in Greece: the others’ side of the story, GreeSe: Hellenic Observatory Papers on Greece and South East Europe, Paper no. 98, April 2016.
[7] Well, how life works out sometimes… In one of these evacuations (see Lower Rectory) among those arrested was… Mr Georgiadis: https://katalipsiprytaneias.espivblogs.net/2015/04/17/ekkenosi-sillif8entes/
[8] Dr. Rosa Vasilaki – The problems of the combat police officer today https://www.bloko.gr/2016/04/blog-post_985.html
[9] ‘Why Do People Riot? Causes, Realities, Ways Forward’, workshop organised by the University of Wolverhampton and ELIAMEP, 5-9 May 2014:
https://www.eliamep.gr/en/event/%CE%B3%CE%B9%CE%B1%CF%84%CE%AF-%CE%BF%CE%B9-%CE%AC%CE%BD%CE%B8%CF%81%CF%89%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%B9-%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B5%CE%B3%CE%B5%CE%AF%CF%81%CE%BF%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%B1%CE%B9-%CE%B1%CE%AF%CF%84%CE%B9/ [the link opens only with copy-paste]
[10] See ibid. “Among the Greek speakers were. O.A.S. Y.), Giannis Bournous, member of the central committee of SYRIZA and its representative in the executive committee of the European Left Party, Nikos Konstantaras, columnist and editor of Kathimerini newspaper.” Full programme here: https://www.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ATHENS-PRIOT-FINAL-PROGRAMME.pdf
[11] What is ELIAMEP? The answer is of course on its website:
“The Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) is an independent, non-profit organization for the production of research, ideas and policy proposals, founded in Athens in 1988.
ELIAMEP’s mission is to develop and disseminate evidence-based knowledge to address the major challenges in the field of European, foreign and wider public policy, and to consolidate Greece’s European orientation.
The aim of ELIAMEP is to provide the public sphere with scientifically based research, studies, analyses and policy proposals, and to offer a permanent, open platform for public debate on the important issues within its areas of interest.
ELIAMEP promotes the values of democratic pluralism, a rational and calm public debate on major regional, European and global challenges, the resolution of disputes through dialogue, and Greece’s European and Euro-Atlantic orientation.” https://www.eliamep.gr/about-us/
[12] https://www.eliamep.gr/en/event/%CE%BA%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%AE-%CE%B5%CE%BA%CE%B4%CE%AE%CE%BB%CF%89%CF%83%CE%B7-lessons-learned-from-radicalization-prevention-efforts-%CE%B1%CE%B8%CE%AE%CE%BD%CE%B1-22/ [the link opens only with copy-paste]
[13] To the delight of those who like to make and reproduce lists, here is the list of participants, with first-class names, not fringe right-wing extremists of the plate: https://www.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/LIst-of-participants.pdf
[15] Dia Anagnostou and Dimitris Skleparis, Forms of radicalisation that can lead to violence. Conclusions and policy proposals. The case of Greece. ELIAMEP, February 2017 (emphasis ours).
https://www.eliamep.gr/en/publication/%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B6%CE%BF%CF%83%CF%80%CE%B1%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%BF%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%AF%CE%B7%CF%83%CE%B7-%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%85-%CE%BC%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%B5%CE%AF-%CE%BD%CE%B1-%CE%BF%CE%B4/[the link opens only with copy-paste]
[16] Rosa Vasilaki, How to explain the phenomenon of violent radicalization? ELIAMEP, 26 June 2017
https://www.eliamep.gr/en/publication/%CF%80%CF%8E%CF%82-%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B7%CE%B3%CE%B5%CE%AF%CF%84%CE%B1%CE%B9-%CF%84%CE%BF-%CF%86%CE%B1%CE%B9%CE%BD%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF-%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82-%CE%B2%CE%AF%CE%B1%CE%B9%CE%B7%CF%82/[the link opens only with copy-paste]
[17] Police Review, March-April 2018.
[18]https://www.facebook.com/rosa.vasilaki/posts/pfbid023Pdoc9EP7gMxZmEgGW2MTu4fRVBnVUBdLFGQ9PouN59nvXPbUBdcBSEJGJnABvHcl