In the 75 years that have passed since the huge EAM rally on December 3, 1944, which was drowned in blood, the opinion that this massacre was the prelude to the civil conflict of 1946-1949 has been expressed many times. It is, essentially, an indisputable reality.
But, even 75 years later, and while recently the Greek historians have shed light with their painstaking research on many "dark" points, for several events of that day there was dichotomy and confusion. With the help of the historian Menelaos Charalambidis , who is currently running an extremely interesting program of historical walks in the city of Athens, we attempted to see the events head on and speak (to you) the language of historical truth.
We asked our interlocutor four "controversial" issues concerning the 3rd of December 1944 and we got answers that have emerged from years of research and are largely recorded in Menelaus Charalambidis' book "December 1944, the battle of Athens" (Alexandria publications).
Who shot first and if the protesters were unarmed...(the question arises why even today, or more correctly, more today, opinions are expressed according to which the massacre started with fire from EAMites who were armed).
Let us leave aside here the testimonies of Greeks who can be accused of a lack of objectivity. There are the testimonies of British and American soldiers who were anything but EAM members. Even the testimony of the member of the group "X" Farmakis states that only the policemen shot, following a relevant order.
For the second part of the question, we can say the following:Yes, at the big rally there were also armed EAM militiamen, as was also the case in the corresponding demonstrations of the EAM against the German occupation. But the guard did not react at all to the shots. There is also the testimony of a militiaman who emphasized that they did not have time to do anything. We must also say, and this is of particular importance, that there was no command from EAM to respond. The guarding had more to do with wanting to show that an organized demonstration was taking place. And of course there weren't many militiamen, anything but.
Well, to answer overall, it's not even a question of who shot first. There was fire only from the side of the security forces.
What happened that morning at the house of the Prime Minister, Georgios Papandreou in Athens.
At that time, George Papandreou kept a house in the center of the city, at 14 Vasilissis Sofias Street. So at the time when demonstrators from the eastern districts of the city came down to take part in the big rally, there was a fight outside the house of the Prime Minister where there were gendarmes.
According to the version of the Gendarmerie, one of the demonstrators tried to attack the house with an improvised grenade, but it exploded in his hands, killing the said protester.
According to the version of the demonstrators, there was no grenade. Just the gendarmes who were outside the house opened fire and killed two people. One dead is absolutely confirmed. Some speculate that there is a third dead person, but this has not been confirmed by the investigation.
Why was Papandreou's proposal for the formation of an ecumenical government with Sofoulis as Prime Minister rejected by the British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill.
It is a fact that from the afternoon of the same day, December 3, 1944, political fermentation began in the background to seek a political solution to the impasse. It was clear that after what had happened in Syntagma Square and the dozens of dead, George Papandreou could no longer stand as Prime Minister. That is why movements were made from all sides, from the British, Papandreou himself and also the EAM.
Papandreou resigned but Churchill, disagreeing even with his Foreign Secretary, did not accept the resignation. This was essentially the second major intervention of the British in the developments that pushed things towards the choice of armed conflict.
Regarding the reasons for Churchill's refusal we can say the following:Apparently the English Prime Minister wanted armed conflict. The Second World War was still going on and obviously Churchill did not want to risk a political defeat by the EAM. Papandreou's resignation was a defeat for him. He wanted, on the contrary, to finish the case as he finally did.
How many were the dead on December 3 and from which sides did they come?
From my research I came across the death of 15 people by Gendarmerie fire that day in Syntagma Square. There are also 5 more almost certain deaths, also by gunfire. In other words, we can talk about at least 20 dead, all of them protestors - EAM members. But there are also people who were injured and succumbed in the following days in hospitals. However, it is difficult to cross-reference these deaths.
There is also a dead person on the other side, the traffic police officer Yiannis Lambropoulos, whose death was confirmed by eyewitnesses. However, it is not entirely clear whether he was killed on December 3rd or later, nor exactly how he was killed.
The ending
In the end, bloodshed was not avoided. From the very next day, the hostilities between the two warring sides began with the battle at Theseio. Two battalions of ELAS confronted Group X thus pushing the button for the start of the conflict that did not end until January 6, 1945 with the British and their Greek allies victorious. Then the Varkiza Agreement took place which, since it was practically never implemented, led to the fratricidal civil war.