In 1957 a brilliant WWII film came out called The Bridge Over The River Kwai. I can’t help thinking that Samaras is now doing exactly what the hapless British commanding officer, Nicholson, was doing in the film. Although this is a very famous film (perhaps because of its very poignancy), I would like to remind you of the plot.
Nicholson (admirably played by Alec Guinness) is in command of the British Army prisoners forced by the Japanese to build the infamous bridge over the river Kwai, of paramount importance for the Japanese forces. After some initial struggles over the Geneva conventions and so forth, Nicholson takes it upon himself as a matter of honour, to prove British prowess and competence, to build this bridge, although he knows of course that it is in Japan’s, the enemy’s that is, interests and detrimental to the British.
Samaras, in his turn, has taken it personally upon himself to carry out the terms of the Memorandum, though he presumable knows that it is detrimental to Greek interests but serves those of the troika. He knows this very well because for the past two years he had been shouting it from the rooftops, and analysing why these terms are so destructive for his own country. But, as for Nicholson, it is a matter of honour. Greece, he tells us, must regain her credibility.
Like Nicholson he throws himself into this project, and the project becomes the only thing that is important for him to the exclusion of every other consideration. The fact that this project is detrimental to his own country’s interests is completely forgotten. Nicholson wanted to prove British superiority in building a bridge that would serve the enemy. Samaras wants to prove that he is credible by unflinchingly imposing a program that everyone knows will lead to the collapse of the Greek economy.
Nicholson finds himself working with the Japanese commander against the interests of his own country. He is not a traitor, he has just lost sight of what is really at stake and thinks that building the bridge is the only thing that matters in the world, totally forgetting he is serving the enemy and not his country.
Samaras too has got caught up in this short sighted attempt to prove his “credibility” and never mind if he is serving the “enemy” and not his country. He thinks he will have proved something if he does everything the “enemy” wants and too bad if its against the fate of Greece.
Nicholson finds himself, in his blind conceit, working against the allied saboteurs who want to blow up the bridge, and working with the Japanese against his own side. Unwittingly. This is the tragedy of the film. And this is the tragedy of Samaras.
Although he knows the project is a catastrophe for his own country’s interests he has thrown himself into applying the terms of this project as an end in itself, regardless of the terrible consequences for Greece.
Only at the very end of the film does Nicholson suddenly realise and cries out “what have I done!”, just before being shot and falling on the detonator himself which blows up the bridge. The bridge he had been struggling to save because it was his achievement, and he had lost sight of everything beyond that. Just as Samaras has done now.
The end of the film was redemptive at least. In that Nicholson is suddenly jolted out of his short sighted idiocy. I doubt whether Samaras’ end (as Prime Minister that is) will be his moment of epiphany.
