Is Greece's Coalition of the Radical Left (Syriza) government a powder keg placed in the heart of the E.U., or is it an alternative solution to the neo-liberal policies that have thus far been imposed to overcome the crisis in Europe? This question is not a concern for Greece and the E.U. alone and it might come under the spotlight as a new economic narrative that will begin with developing countries in the 21st century. It is no longer satisfactory to use traditional concepts of "left" or "right" to explain political movements such as Syriza that have arisen as a reaction to the crisis. Syriza has come to power not because it identifies itself as a leftist party, but because it separated from the orthodox understanding of leftism and assured the Greek public that it would overcome neo-liberal policies.Indeed, Greece's Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) party, which pursues a national-leftist line as a remnant of reactionary European social democracy, received 4.69 percent of vote while the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), which branches out from orthodox leftism, received 5.48 percent of vote. These voting rates indicate that all political lines of this kind have ended both in Greece and in the whole of Europe.As is well-known, leftism has been on a soul-searching mission ever since Europe's social democrat parties became part of nation-states and war by contravening the decisions that were taken against imperialist war in Basel in 1912. Karl Liebknecht was the sole member of the Reichstag who objected to war during the vote that was held on war expenditures on Dec. 2, 1914. Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg were killed on Jan. 15, 1919 for their opposition to chauvinism and imperialist war and, thus, leftism ended in Europe while the 2008 crisis put an end to traditional rightist policies in Europe. It is possible then to argue that Syriza's electoral victory is not only a new phenomenon for Greece, but is also something new for all European politics covering leftist and rightist movements.So, what should Syriza do, and which political path it should follow? Let us seek an answer to this question by considering the aforementioned historical background. Syriza will have an opportunity to rescue Greece and Europe from crisis to the extent that it goes beyond the leftist understanding dating back to the 20th century and it develops a new path. In parallel with this, Syriza has to follow Turkey and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's way of struggling against neo-liberal policies as well as keeping in mind that the Greek people elected Syriza because of its objection to such policies. It has to develop common policies with Turkey on Syria, Egypt, Palestine and Cyprus. It has to object to the plans of the Greek Cyprus, Israel and Jordan in order to give Gaza's offshore natural gas resources back to the Palestinian people. The first step of this is the resumption of negotiations on the Cyprus issue to establish peace on the ethnically divided island.If Syriza follows PASOK's nationalist policies it will fall into a trap. Syriza has to go beyond European leftism's nationalist path dating back to 1914 and view Turkey, the Middle East and the Caucasus from a new perspective. It should also put aside conservative leftist lines to transcend austerity policies imposed by the troika of the International Monetary Fund, European Commission and the European Central Bank (ECB). It is a favorable development that Syriza attaches priority to overcoming neo-liberal policies and it reached an agreement on forming a coalition with the right-wing Independent Greeks (ANEL). ANEL, which pursues an anti-EU political line, is a right-wing political movement that objects to Germany's austerity policies like Syriza, and the coalition of the two parties shows that Syriza responds to the preferences of the public.Here, we can put forth an argument not only for Syriza and Greece, but also for all developing countries regardless of their rightist of leftist origins. These countries can develop a competitive, open economy to the extent that they go beyond monopolistic, statistic, neo-liberal policies that have thus far been imposed on them. Contrary to popular claims, neo-liberal policies do not attach priority to a competitive open economy, but they restrain market entries by creating monopolistic markets. Thus, they pose serious threats by shrinking markets in addition to plummeting profit rates in the long term. Today, anti-monopolistic regulations are a way of establishing a truly competitive open economy. So, developing countries should make financial market regulations with anti-monopolistic reforms. Countries like Greece should immediately launch anti-monopolistic regulations and their banking systems should finance SMEs, so that the ECB's monetary expansion comes in useful, and this expansion nourishes a real economy in competitive terms. The banking system should be moved away from being a monopolistic financial system and should be regulated based on venture capital. This, beyond any doubt, will be the new deal of the South and East. There is no alternative way out of this, not only for Greece, but also for Portugal, Spain, Italy and France.