RSS

September 23, 2008

Florian Kuhne, Freie Universität Berlin, Gold Contributor (116)

This is a very interesting article about the work and role of the new Italian government, especially the work of PM Berlusconi. You mentioned a lot of things I did not know/hear of in the German media.

In my point of view, which is, as I said, a more semi-informed German point of view, Italy faces a lot of problems, in domestic and in foreign policy, and PM Berlusconi is not as competent as he sees himself. The best example maybe is the processes going on with Alitalia. Berlusconi promised to rescue the company from disposal to the French group in March or April and then brought in his business venture CAI which failed with its last offer to Alitalia last Friday and now the "Wings of Italy" are going to maybe collapse in total. Berlusconi has to take this into his personal account.

Another problem seems to be the declining economy of Italy. The debts of the state are high, unemployment rates among youths are raising. Berlusconi did apparently a good job in cleaning Napoli, but a lot of problems are waiting. The attacks against immigrants, especially Africans, this weekend shocked me personally and Italy as a whole. Berlusconi has to commit, that his talking about a clean Italy and of deporting immigrants has contributed to the tensioned situation in Italy. Fear and a feeling of helplessness is going around among foreigners and the situation is not getting better with men from the party of Berlusconi talking about the fascists were not the evil in itself.

These are things we recognize in Germany, please adjust my point of view if you think I talk nonsense, but I could not understand - with all the mistakes Prodi made in account - when Italians voted for that guy Berlusconi again this year. He knows how to sell himself and thats maybe impressing, but a man who owns tv-channels, a soccer club and multiple other companies must not get Prime Minister of a (yet) leading industrial country.

September 29, 2008

Oreste Foppiani

Dear Mr. Kuhne,

Accusing Berlusconi of Alitalia's present situation is too easy. The problem is much more complex and it is the sum of many variants. Just to give a clear example, years ago the highly politicised Italian unions accepted much more painful restructuring plans with little protest: maybe because the plan was coming from a leftist or centre-left government?

Frankly, the main leftist union (CGIL) is playing the game of Berlusconi's political opponents. CGIL placed the blame on Berlusconi and decided not to back his rescue plan, even though it meant laying-off thousands of employees. Additionally, many CGIL-affiliated workers gave back their union card because they understood that political and partial interests of a minority were damaging the majority of the workers, who are now facing unemployment.

Furthermore, from a merely economic point of view, I would have preferred to see Alitalia shut down ten years ago, and re-opened under a new name with healthy, fresh capital: who said that Italy must have a national airline? A national airline is not a dogma, and Italy is not different from Switzerland (Swiss Air) and Belgium (Sabena). Yet, from a merely political point of view, Alitalia must remain a national company for the usual "bella figura" politics of the Boot, i.e., a question of international image and the notion that the company's "Italian-hood" will help to manage its business and employees in a better way.

On whether Berlusconi's is incompetent to rule the country one needs strong evidence and not newspaper articles, mainly dealing with the Premier’s pending judicial affairs or the opposition propaganda toward the media tycoon. As an example, the garbage problem in Naples was totally mismanaged by the leftist regional administration and was fixed by the "unfit" and "incompetent" Berlusconi. Are the more competent those ones who wasted time, postponed the problem, and lost electoral consensus?

On the subject of electoral consensus, if the majority of the Italian people elected the centre-right government led by Berlusconi, isn't it because the centre-left offered the citizens, as my security expert colleague Giovanni Arcudi once told me, "two years of jazzy and folkloristic government and promised to offer another three years of government of the same kind?” As an example, Arcudi reminded me recently, "the centre-left government gave nefarious examples of national disunity (e.g., street protests against the Italian military missions abroad or the enlargement of the NATO base near Vicenza led by members of the cabinet), which exposed us as the unreliable partner of the coalition." Of course, this coalition does not need blind acceptance, but a responsible alliance. Right or wrong, Italy is a NATO member and "pacta sunt servanda."

On the economic crisis, other countries would better stick close to home: USA, France and Switzerland are also fighting against recession and non-growth. The Italian economy is surely declining, but even on this point, accusing Berlusconi of being the cause of all evils and problems is too easy a target: the left is only doing him a favour when it depicts him as a perfect chief scapegoat. If more than 50% of the electorate voted for Berlusconi last April, it is because they were not satisfied with Professor Prodi's economic policies. The Italian left has not yet taken this on board.

On the television's monopoly, one might ask her- or himself why the centre-left and its main party (the PD or "Partito Democratico") had never actually voted a bill on the "conflict of interests" concerning a media multi-millionaire politician running for office. Berlusconi was elected the first time 14 years ago and he was not always in power. Additionally, the Tax Payer knows that the national television (RAI) is home of nepotism, favouritism and a spoils system. When in the 1980s PCI, DC, and in minor part the PSI, controlled the three national channels, I do not recall any battles to reform the system.

Last but not least, the Italian people and voters are not stupid. If they voted the centre-right is because the centre-left did not solve the daily problems of every Italian: escalating cost of living, university education crisis, an underfinanced national health system, organised crime, corruption et cetera. Affirming that Berlusconi charmed a magic spell whose ingredients were his shake-and-grin political shows, his TV stars, soubrettes, football players, hymns and flying flags is illogical; affirming he is an incompetent is just nonsense. Democracy is made of alternated power and now it is time for Berlusconi to face Italy's problems: on the final results of his government, the electorate will decide again what to do with him. It is weird that when a rightist government comes to power in Italy, the left decries the comeback of fascism. It is time to leave fascism to historians, who may (at last!) analyse and study this complex phenomenon without any political use of history.

The demonization of the political adversary is an old weapon of the Cold War years: an instrument that often helped the left to delegitimize the right to position itself as the only viable alternative. This is a contradiction in itself. 75% of the Italian press rides the horse of fear (the comeback of fascism) and like parrots some Italians abroad, and even politicians in the European Parliament, repeat the old leitmotiv. In so doing, they ruin Italy’s image abroad. National unity and patriotism are still unknown words among certain journalists who favour propagating a negative image of the Belpaese.

Italy not only needs a new approach to politics, patriotism, World War II history, and fascism (without fearing the old accusation of "revisionism"), but also a good dose of intellectual honesty among the editors of its main newspapers.

October 1, 2008

Florian Kuhne, Freie Universität Berlin, Gold Contributor (116)

Dear Signore Foppiani,

maybe I could not clearify my point of view. I did not mean to blame Berlusconi alone for the state Italy is in and I did not mean to accuse the Italian voters as stupid, as you maybe understood it. What I wanted to stress is the concern with which I read and hear about the development of Italy in the last years. Maybe I need to mention that I love the country, I travelled it several times, almost every year since 2001 and I hardly read and understand Italian and met with Italians throughout this time. The tenor of all private talks I had with (young) Italians always has been one of concern, distrust and frustration about the situation. A lot of things are going in the wrong direction in Italy (as in almost every country of the West at present), but with what I really have a problem is the strategy of Mr Berlusconi. His rationale that foreigners are in a big part accountable for problems concerning employment or the social system is too easy, it is polemic and almost xenophobe.

The administration of Mr. Prodi to me seemed as a new hope after the Berlusconi years, but then, and I'm absolutely with you in this point, he and his ministers diasappointed and failed in all projects. But this is nothing to laugh about or point with the finger on them, blaming them. Its just very sad to see, that an adminstration who tried to bring together the interests of as much groups as possible is to be doomed in the political framework of Italy. And you will go along with me when I mention that Berlusconi spoiled every attempt of the Prodi government to advance political processes. You may go along with me when saying that this happened out of a personal rationale, out of his image cultivation/profiling and out of vanity.

I'm sorry but I can not accept the Berlusconi government as the best one for Italy these although I can not name anyone in Italy who is better suited for the actual situation. Please do not get me wrong, I do not want to offend Italians, I'm just not agreeing with the personality, the political style and the polemics of Mr Berlusconi.

October 8, 2008

Oreste Foppiani

Herr Kuhne,

Thank you for your prompt reply.

While I realise that your point was not concerning the Italian population in
general, sometimes, samples of ideas and opinions collected in specific
milieus do not correspond to the overall thought among the mass or better the
citizenry. Of course, every opinion is worth considering, and every
democratic person should always think like Voltaire: "I disapprove of
what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Mr. Berlusconi is nor a saint neither a devil, but a typical
multi-millionaire with a penchant for picturesque jokes, vanity and a
film-star attitude. His personal and despicable style aside, he is also an
experienced Christian-Democrat-like politician that after three lustres in
national politics is now used to exploit people's frustrations and
aspirations to get votes and popular support. "His Frequency" feels the pulse
of the crowd and responds to its needs. It is indeed an apparent
populist attitude, which does not help him to improve his political image.
However, the Milanese politician is much more than a caricature of himself
or worse both a court jester and illusionist.

Concerning Prof. Prodi's good intentions and policies, I believe that he
tried to put together the many souls of the leftist coalition for the good of
the country. Although he did fail, I would not focus his failure only on the
confusion dominating inside the "Olive Tree" political group. For example, the PD and other leftist parties distanced themselves more and more from the Tax Payer or the average 1.000-Euro-per-month citizen, who did not see her/his interests represented and protected by Prodi's government.

Berlusconi's goals are clear and have not to be confused with his judicial problems or business interests: he wants a new Italy and he is truly working to improve a country that willy nilly is still profoundly divided between the South and the North of the Peninsula, and burdened by a Byzantine and elephantiac Public Administration. Fiscal federalism and structural reforms will drive the Boot into a new, modern phase within the EU and the Mediterranean countries.

Of course, in case of failure, the leftist coalition will have ample space to implement its reformist plan. In the next five years, Berlusconi will have to show to his voters, and all Italian citizens, the soundness of his plan...or retire from politics for good.

January 16, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

Dear Signore Foppiani,

Thank you for your article and comments. I would like to return to your initial remarks about Italy's diplomatic and defense roles within the European Union, particularly with regard to the Middle East.

If I understand correctly from speaking with other Italian analysts, Italy tried to develop its role as a member of the E3 early on in the diplomatic approach to Iran, only to be rejected by those countries, which wanted to limit participation along the lines: if Italy joins the E3, then room must be made for Spain and others. Is this a correct reading, in your view?

Also on the domestic scene, is it true that Italy under Berlusconi in 2002-03 did not really want to sign on to the E3 initiatives toward Iran out of concern that this action might displease the Bush Administration and damage its Atlanticist credentials?

Do you agree that only direct US engagement with Iran under a new Obama Administration would allow the US and the Europeans to make headway in negotiations about the nuclear question as one in a whole array of issues that must be on the table in future negotiations?

How can Berlusconi's action to lift restrictions on the Italian military come into play in the latest conflict in Gaza?Or in Afghanistan as the US troops are downsized in Iraq during the coming years?

What type of European Union actions do you envisage in Gaza? What is the value added that Italy may contribute? Do you believe that European foreign policy actions must be lead by the ;larger countries? If so, how can the middle sized and smaller countries still contribute so as not to be sidelined?

It strikes me that the Lisbon Treaty introduces a post of European foreign minister with a position description that could be impossible for any one person to achieve. The role of the European institutions is still not a central one in foreign policy at the European level in that Treaty. It may be personalities who dominate the European foreign policy process rather than institutions in the future. Am I wrong in this reading of possible future scenarios?

I appreciate your comments on any of these questions. Greetings from New York.

Sincerely, Colette Mazzucelli

March 3, 2009

Oreste Foppiani

Dear Dr Mazzucelli,

Re your questions on the E3 Group, I think that the Italian "waltz tour" with the most useful and interesting partner is a leitmotif of its foreign policy, and probably it is a standardized, foreign-policy move for every mid-sized and/or regional power.

The EU is increasingly in need of a European Directorate on the model of the concerto of powers established in 1815-1822 after the Napoleonic era, and the E3 is the embryo of this directorate. The EU button room would adhere to the saying "the more, the merrier," but that is not case, and the EU Directorate model will also serve other purposes. For exampe, the present and unjust trilinguism in Brussels is one of the hints, which show that Germany, Great Britain, and France, "rule the waves."

When Italy asked to enter the E3, it was clear she would not have found an open door. Additionally, Spain, together with France, bears the brunt of EU competition with Italy and will always ask to join the same group. However, Italy's credentials with the US, at least during the tenure of the Bush administration, will help Rome to position itself in the E3 Group, even though Italy is perceived as always seeking "bella figura" without real substantial contributions.

It is true that Italy, in 2002-2003, under Berlusconi's administration, did not want to displease Bush. However, now with Obama things will change considerably: no more need to cut a nice figure with the "American Big Brother:" we need pragmatic choices and effective foreign policy actions to cement the weak EU foreign policy. Italy, has some good potential in the Mediterranean, as shown by the UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) mission, where French and Italian interests converged into Sarkozy's UPM: it is a good start indeed.

In Gaza, the EU has to stop sending money to the official government, but send consistent peace troops or corps to stabilize and monitor the region.The US will soon have to reduce its engagement in that area, and consequently the EU will have to be held accountable. Brussels has to stop passing the buck to the US and face its responsibilities as for troops, money, and then implement its future foreign policy following the "dictum" of the Lisbon Treaty.

Additionally, the EU foreign minister is not a myth, although American executive chiefs and politicians always think of Kissinger's famous phrase: "If I have to call Europe, what is the phone number?"

If we do not want to go back to pre-1940 Europe, two things are of paramount importance: a common foreign policy, and most importantly, efficient and independent EU Armed Forces. Yes, we...could.

Greetings from Geneva,

Oreste Foppiani

March 18, 2009

Elijah K.

Italy has been hit hard by the current economic crisis and La Recessione. And I think that it is the duty of the Prime Minister to decide what is the best for his country. And if his promises of delivering solutions to the recession like re-stimulating the spending and jobs and also the proposal he made of building a bridge to Sicily. This bridge which is 2,000 years in the making and originally an idea since the Roman Empire that even the famous Charlemagne wanted it to happen will connect Sicily and the mainland of Italy. This project is expansive at 2-miles long and 6-lanes wide will be the largest suspension bridge in the world that will connect Italy and its closest Mediterranean neighbor.