His Final Bow - Not Yet

In his farewell video, Silvio Berlusconi said that he was not going to give up politics… on the contrary, he would double his effort to change the country. One of his supporters here in Rome put up posters saying that he too would “double” whether efforts or stakes in not clear. On the face of it, there is no reason to presume that Berlusconi is out of politics for good.

After he resigned, he pointed out, quite correctly that he had not lost a vote of no confidence and that he still has an absolute majority in the Senate where he has already said that he can pull the plug on the Monti government whenever he wants. Rather more self-servingly, he argued in the message that his move had been “statesmanlike”; in his version, he gave up power for the good of the country. Either way, it was far less than the body blow that many of the foreign media were trumpeting. It was significant that The Economist titled its article “Addio Silvio” not “Arriverderci” (see you again), a hope rather than a statement. Those celebrating his resignation in Rome a fortnight ago were too smart to think either that the country’s problems were over or that Berlusconi had left for good. There has been no political equivalent of the stake through the heart; a resounding defeat either in Parliament or at the polls.

Since then he has again told PdL senators that the government “will last as long as we want it to” and the Monti government has “suspended democracy”.

There were even suggestions that one of the reasons that Berlusconi stepped down was the dip in Mediaset shares. Three days before he went, they tumbled 12.5% . If this was the case, then the conflict of interests had come back to bite him hard and where it hurts, in his pocket. If true, it would have meant that he resigned in order to prevent the collapse of his own companies. The opposite thesis was also aired; that by leaving office, Berlusconi’s companies would have to forego the lucrative government publicity contracts. The fact that both theses are plausible shows how deep the marriage between public and private interest was in Berlusconi’s management.

Yesterday he was again back in the political business… as if he ever went away. In Verona he started what looked very much like an election campaign, one which might last until spring 2013. He launched it with a message that was almost identical to the one that put him in power in 1994. In this clip, he is generous with his favourite words libertà and comunismo going as far as to say that “we must fight for our freedom”. This would be comic in a country where communists are on the endangered species list if it wasn’t for his only concrete definition of the end of “freedom” as being a state where transactions of €200-300 must be verifiable and traceable. He said that such a regulation would put Italy in danger of becoming a “tax police state”. He was saying that “freedom” was freedom to evade taxes.

Granted he has said that he will not stand for office again; granted also that his eyes had narrowed and his face was puffy and he faltered a little on some lines but it was still an expert performance by any standards. It all depends on what sort of appeal the well-worn rhetoric will have beyond the Berlusconi diehards

Even though his departure was precipitate, it was controlled and planned. He produced a video message which was shown across the networks. The fact that a prime minister bowed out with a special message is exceptional – normally resigning leaders confine themselves to a short statement conceding defeat and wishing their successors well. Not Silvio Berlusconi. Either he is in denial and maybe even his analyst could not work that out or he is just resting. Certainly, he is not the retiring type.

Despite his claims of not seeking office again, there is a real possibility that he will make another run for power either in the near future, if the Monti government shows itself unable to calm the markets and elections are called early next year or in 2013 when the legislature reaches its natural term and if Monti is successful in bringing the Italy debt under control and giving some hope to the economy. In order to do it, Monti will have made Italians pay a high price economically and socially and the political parties will be able to blame him for the hurt rather than themselves. Given Berlusconi’s reluctance to support Monti, he will try and present himself as the return to the good times.

In either scenario, he will have his television stations – the three he owns and some residual support in two of the RAI public channels. Monti’s government has neither the time nor the style to move Berlusconi supporters out of positions of power. He still has his print media, dailies and weeklies and of course he still has in practice unlimited financial resources. He has of course lost that other commodity that used so well over the past year, government patronage – a number of his new supporters last year came over with an offer of an undersecretaryship or the like – but he can and no doubt will, promise jobs in his future government.

The other element which helped keep him in power for eight of the last ten years is almost as valid today as before; the divisions in the opposition. For the moment, at least, most of the left, all of the center-left and the center have united around Monti to address the crisis but we can be pretty sure that they will start bickering as soon as elections come round.

Worse, there is at least one dark scandal cloud hanging over the main center-left party, the Democratic Party, (PD). There are allegations of illegal financing in Milan over many years with the main person involved closely linked to the party secretary Pierluigi Bersani. Whatever the truth of the allegations, we can be sure that the Berlusconi media will hammer the story, not one to have on the front pages during a campaign. The centrist UDC is also involved in accusations of corruption involving the state owned Finmeccanica.

Today despite the economic and financial disaster that Italy finds itself it, he still has an approval rating of over 20%. The polls give the center left parties a good majority but over the last few months the biggest party and still growing, are the undecided and non-voters. In the past Berlusconi has been able to bring them out.

There is also the possibility that he will try and act from behind the scenes, hand over gracefully to the party secretary Angelino Alfano. But Alfano is a lightweight and Berlusconi likes the limelight too much.

He still has many obstacles to making a comeback. No longer prime minister, he will find it much more difficult to avoid the hearing in his four trials (three for corruption and one for abuse of power and sex with an under age prostitute) and his party too, like the center-left, is divided. He is also 75 and showing his age so it will not be easy.

After years of saying that Berlusconi was finished and about the leave the scene, it would be unwise to presume that this exit is the definitive one.

This blog is an updated version of Berlusconi's Final Act published in Foreign Policy on 16 November.

Monti

Italy’s new prime minister is the antithesis of his predecessor. Not only are there no dirty jokes, orgies and multiple properties vaunted before visiting heads of state, there is almost no spin, no promises and no instant remedies. Mario Monti’s style reflects the other side of Milan and Italy as a whole as does the other Mario – Draghi who took over as head of the European Central Bank a fortnight before Monti became Prime Minister.

And his approval ratings suggest that Italians overwhelming support him. As he was winning his votes of confidence last week, 83.8% approved of him and 78.6% approved of his government compared to 22.4% for Berlusconi and 20.5% for his government at the end of October.

He and his ministers have said almost nothing in the week that they have held office. Most have not opened their mouths in public and the ones that have, said very little. Health minister, Renato Balduzzi appeared on Lilli Gruber’s “Otto e Mezzo”, the quietest and most respectable political talk show very different from the Coliseum act that most of the others put on; he did not say very much about what the Monti government would do. The only person who has been outspoken is the development and integration minister (a new post), Andrea Riccardi who reiterated President Napolitano’s statement that the children of immigrants born and brought up in Italy should have Italian citizenship, a controversial topic for the Northern League and some of the right but not part of the government plan.

For his part Monti is working on the supplementary budget measures that he hopes to pass before Christmas. He will need to do a lot more communicating to get it through parliament and a suffering public. His main fault so far has been to move very slowly and very quietly.

Almost certainly the local property tax on first houses (ICI) abolished by Berlusconi will be reinstated. This will take some of the pressure of city administrations which had to cut services or raise charges. There’s a good chance of a wealth tax although the centre-right has said that they oppose it. According to a Demos survey this week, most Italians expect and accept the property tax, the wealth tax and possibly an increase in income tax as long as they are progressive taxes and as long as they catch tax evaders. There is a problem of course in that “tax evasion” is something that only other do, by definition – if I pay a professional or an artisan in cash, that’s not evasion; it’s only the fat cats that evade… So if Monti really does clamp down on the grey economy, there will certainly be reactions.

He will also have to face the pension issue; the same survey showed that raising the pensionable age is very unpopular but will have to be done sooner or later. The other controversial issue is the reduction of job security, something which the unions and the left have made very clear is unacceptable. But it is an issue which Monti can finesse as employers can already lay off employees if the accounts show that the firm is at risk.
Whatever measures he does propose, they will have to navigate between the shoals of the uneasy coalition of centre-left and centre-right. The parties, especially the old centre-right majority have made it very clear that they could bring down the government whenever they want.

All the talk about a technocratic government being “undemocratic” dissolves when faced with the reality of parliamentary supremacy. It is true that Monti was not elected by the people but it is equally true that their representatives will have to accept whatever measures the government proposes.

This reality even allowed Monti a joke when he said in his speech asking the Chamber for their confidence “I would ask you not to refer to parliamentary democracy and the government’s complete reliance on Parliament with the electrical metaphor of ‘pulling the plug’; it is not clear whether we might be considered an electric razor or an artificial lung”. His government is actually both.

Of course the government is weak and vulnerable to whatever winds are blowing through Montecitorio but its very weakness combined with the storms howling outside Parliament paradoxically give Monti a good chance of surviving the full term simply because no one dares to take the responsibility of bringing him down. Both the big parties are internally divided which will also help Monti.

He started well enough in Brussels but that was predictable and it would have been a disaster if he hadn’t come home with at least the verbal the support of Merkozy. Even without concrete measures from Brussels, Italians are happy to see their Prime Minister be treated as an equal by the leaders of the two other big euro economies. If he can get the supplementary budget measures through before Christmas including at least some of the controversial items like property tax on first houses, wealth tax and some labour flexibility measure, then the rest will be (relatively) easy.

Endgame

For the oncologist, a cancer can be fascinating – for the patient, rather less. Studying Italian politics is truly enthralling, living it and facing the consequences leaves one a lot less enthralled. The moves and counter moves over the last few days have the allure of the Spassky-Fisher chess clash and are a lot more understandable to the non-initiated, but as a citizen facing the possible consequences of an Italian meltdown is a frightening prospect.

On Tuesday, Berlusconi was to have faced a no confidence vote if he failed to win an absolute majority in the budget ratification vote. In the event, he took 308 votes, eight less than the 316 necessary; “traitors” as he scribbled on his notepad. The next move should have been the opposition tabling a vote of no confidence to be voted on in the next few days. Instead, Berlusconi outmanoeuvred them by promising President Napolitano that he would resign… after the package promised to the EU had been passed. The bill is a complicated one and on Tuesday evening, no one was certain whether it would take a few days or a few weeks. Until then, Berlusconi was safe and in power as no one would table a no-confidence motion while the bill was being discussed. After that, he said he hoped there would be early elections though he allowed that it was the President’s prerogative to decide. He also hoped that the promise of his resignation would calm the markets. The subtext was that in the time before Christmas, Berlusconi might be able to salavage his majority as he had done exactly a year ago.

Instead, the markets went mad. The spread between German and Italian bonds had already reached a new record 495 on Tuesday after the budget vote. Yesterday it went up up to a devastating 570. Ten year Italian bonds were at 7.47%, well over the presumed danger mark of 7%. Berlusconi’s spokesmen try to spin this by saying since he has promised to resign, this shows that it is not his presence which caused the run on the Italian treasury bonds. In fact, though, the markets like the street in Rome, once again, didn’t believe him. He has made too many promises and one to resign without even a date on it, was not plausible. The idea that there might be elections with Angelino Alfano as Berlusconi’s successor also raised eyebrows of disbelief. Alfano would be an obvious front for Berlusconi so would mean absolute continuity.

Faced with turmoil in the markets, President Napolitano made his move. He issued a statement reiterating Berlusconi’s commitment to resign, locking him into that commitment, and saying that the European recovery measures would be passed “with days”, hinting that he wanted the bill on his desk before Sunday to avoid more confusion when the markets open on Monday. Most of the opposition figures said they would support the easy passage of the bill through both houses, at worst abstaining but not obstructing.

Napolitano’s final move was to appoint Mario Monti life senator, a move seen as a prelude to asking him to form a government. Berlusconi himself accepted the proposition of a future Monti government (though some are suggesting he might be finance minister in an Amato government).

It looked as if Berlusconi was on the defensive again, check if not yet check mate.

Monti is by far the best candidate to lead a technocrat government which is the only way out of Italy’s predicament. He is well-respected in Brussels and in the European capital both as an academic economist and a very able politician. As European commissioner for competition, he took on Microsoft and won. He was appointed by Berlusconi and confirmed by the centre-left D’Alema government in 1999 so cannot be called partisan.

Yesterday evening and this morning, it seemed as if it were a done deal with Monti presumably sounding people out for possible positions in a government which would begin early next week with a “huge job to do”.

Now, we are back to uncertainty with part of the PdL calling for elections and part accepting the Monti option. Antonio Di Pietro has said that he will not support Monti but his supporters are furious. Less surprising, the Northern League will not support the technocrat. This leaves the PD, the centrists, some of the left and some of the PdL supporting the government of national unity, far less than the big majority all party support that Monti or anyone else would demand before taking up the job.

No wonder the employers’ federation’s financial paper Il Sole 24 Ore has Fate Presto (Act Quickly) on its web page in huge characters.

The package promised by Berlusconi to the EU when passed, will be a start, but then there will be difficult times, more cuts and greater hardships, possible if the new prime minister can work with most of the parliament, employers and unions and above all show that public sector cuts mean cutting politicians’ privileges.

Tomorrow the bill goes to the Senate – that will be the test… or the next move towards a still distant endgame.

A Necessary but Not Sufficient Condition

Silvio Berlusconi’s demise is imminent. It might happen tomorrow when the Chamber votes on last year’s budget statement. It might happen the day after tomorrow if the opposition tables a motion of no confidence. It might happen next week when the Senate votes on the reform package that the government put to the European institutions last week. Or he might just be able to drag it out until January.

But when it happens, then the real work will begin to put Italy and indirectly the euro back on track. And how it happens will condition the recovery.

The immediate question is when and how he leaves Palazzo Chigi; certainly there is no lack of pressure to get him out. The opposition had been screaming for months, but that is normal; the European institutions plus Merkel and Sarkozy have been making strong hints since August; his natural allies, the Church and the employers’ federation, the Confindustria have been explicit in their distaste for his person and policy for many weeks. But over the last week or so, an increasing number of party loyalists have been saying that he ought to “step aside” for the good of the party and the country.

The old Christian Democrat stalwart, Beppe Pisanu has said it explicitly for weeks and over the weekend, Berlusconi’s two most faithful followers have added their voices; Angelino Alfano, former minister of justice and now anointed successor and Gianni Letta, Berlusconi’s longterm eminence grise and fixer have tried to persuade him that it would be better to go willingly and have some control on what follows than be pushed ignominiously.

Today, at least, Berlusconi did not get the message – the night and grey light of dawn might make him change his mind.

In the meantime, the markets made their opinion abundantly clear. The spread on Monday morning between German and Italian bonds went up to its 491 points, the highest since the euro was introduced. Long term borrowing rates went up to 6.67% perilously close to 7% which is where Ireland, Portugal and Greece got into trouble. Both indices dropped mid-morning when there was a rumour that he was about to resign and then went up again when the rumour was denied. According to one calculation Berlusconi’s resignation would apparently mean a drop of 100 points in the spread.

Significantly the resignation rumours came from two Berlusconi faithfuls, the court jester Giuliano Ferrara in one of the family papers and Francesco Bechis deputy editor of Libero another centre-right paper. Berlusconi denied it using old-fashioned news agency wires but also Facebook.

He spent much of the day with his children and closest business associate, Fedele Confaloniere, presumably working out damage control action for the family’s Fininvest holdings, a good and possibly final example of Berlusconi’s priorities. The euro is at risk through Italian inaction, but the Italian prime minister is looking after family interests.

Over the weekend, Roberto Maroni, minister of the Interior and potential leader of the Northern League admitted that the coalition no longer had a majority but like other government supporters said that the only answer is early elections on the grounds that “the sovereign people” had chosen Berlusconi’s coalition in 2008 so they should choose a possible substitution – immediately.

The constitution, though, gives the prerogative to the President, hence Napolitano’s consultations over the last week to sound out possible alternatives.

If tomorrow’s vote does not pass, then Berlusconi will have to tender his resignation. If it passes without an absolute majority, then the opposition have promised that they will table an motion of no confidence which is likely to pass. Again, resignation. If enough waverers have been convinced by Berlusconi over the night, then the whole performance will be repeated next week when the European package will be voted on.

When it happens, Napolitano will have (at the moment), three choices. The first is a Letta-led government. This would mean continuity as Letta is Berlusconi’s man but it would almost certainly exclude the main opposition party, the PD which has said they will not support Letta. There is some talk of Giuliano Amato, the Socialist leader who took over from a discredited Bettino Craxi in 1991 and introduced swingeing taxes once before. The other possible leader is Mario Monti, former European commissioner, well-respected on the left and the right, in Milan, Rome, Berlin, Paris and Brussels. If takes the job and can put together a team capable of implementing equitable austerity measures and a growth package, then there is hope for Italy and the euro. But it is a tall order

I was asked for an assessment of possible “social unrest if the new government were to put through draconian reforms”. That problem will be high on Monti’s or whoever does get the job, list of risks. There are two reasons for optimism – despite the relative decline over the last decade, Italy is still a wealthy country with savings which can and are already being drawn upon. It also has one of the biggest grey economies in the EU, one which works in areas that Draco does not reach.
So it is unlikely that there will be widespread unrest like in Greece or in Italy in 1968-69 or 1977. With the double underpinning of a revolutionary left wing ideology and mass protests, it is also unlikely that we’ll see widespread terrorist violence as in the ‘70s and early ‘80s.

Still, Italy has a long history of political violence, it is part of the language of politics in the whole of united Italy. It only takes a few hundred well-organised activists as we saw last month, to set Rome ablaze and there are still a few Red Brigade diehards, exiles from a different era, still prepared to murder. And there is genuine hardship with increasing levels of poverty and discontent so Italy next revolution, the one that is just beginning, will not be completely velvet.

But before anything happens, there must be the change of the man on the throne… the substance will follow.

“New Italians” – Leadership in the Immigrant Communities

Lele Luzzati’s picture of the she-wolf playing with children of different colours while looking after her foundlings is a perfect image of an Italy we hope is being created. And with a little help from our friends we made a tiny contribution last month with a two day seminar for potential future immigrant community leaders working with the Rome city authorities.

The biggest single change in Italy over the last 20 year is not Berlusconi despite the coverage he gets – it is the dramatically changing face (literally) of the country to immigration, the first peaceful influx of people since the Roman empire.

So far, the experience has been largely positive both for Italians and for the new arrivals and their children but there is no reason to presume that it will always be like that. Already the Northern League has started trying to ride a racist tiger and other politicians are tempted by easy and vicious populism. There have been no riots like the ones in Lancashire in 2001 or in the Paris banlieues in 2005 but the Italian immigrant experience is hardly 20 years old. There are a lot of us who would like Italy to learn from the mistakes of other Europeans and north Americans… put frivolously, to make new mistakes and not the same ones that the British, the French, the Americans have made.

According to the latest Caritas report on immigration in Italy, there are 4,570,000 regular immigrants, or more than 7.5% of the population. Italy has changed dramatically over the last 20 years. When I came to Italy in the 1974, there was one foreign restaurant in the whole of Rome (Eau vive, a French restaurant run by Vietnamese nuns) and a non-white face in the street was a rarity. Today, Rome is still not comparable to London, New York or Paris but it is becoming multicultural. There are ethnic restaurants everywhere, businesses run by immigrants, carers from eastern Europe and Asia and building workers from eastern Europe. Even the village in the country where I do my weekend shopping there is an internet and remittance centre in the square run by Bengladeshis and round the corner, a new shop selling Romanian groceries.

Despite the language used by the Northern League and other anti-immigrant politicians, immigrants contribute massively to Italian society – with their labour which generates growth for the Italian economy and with their presence and their children. Italy is declining both economically and demographically.

The issues are how to integrate this presence.

Since 2003, Rome city council has had four adjunct councillors elected on a continental basis – the Americas, Africa, Asia and (eastern) Europe by resident non-EU citizens (EU citizens have had the vote and the possibility of standing for election since 1997). The have voice but no vote in the council.

Over the last few years, they have presented parts of their constituencies’ cultures – mostly their food and music; it’s more difficult to be anti-immigrant in the middle of a party. This year the fourth edition of “I mondi a Roma” enlisted The American University of Rome to organise a seminar for future leaders.

There are something under a million “new Italians” or “second generation” and 24 of them attended two full day seminars along with a wide variety of others. The aim was to give participants some of the knowledge and skills they might need as well giving them some sort of inspiration and sensation that immigration in Italy is an opportunity not a problem. They were also expected to complete exercises, some on real issues (how would you spend a €500,000 EU grant to support media campaigns for integration), some on more hypothetical but controversial issues (how would you deal with a riot in a poor part of Rome after a policeman shot a young immigrant) or less controversial (how would you mediate the different community needs in the urban renewal of a city square).

On the first day, Rodolfo Giorgetti and Stefania Congia of the Italian Ministry of Labor and Social Policy explained how immigration and diversity enrich the host country and the Ministry’s integration policies. Barbara Fridel and Simona Moscarelli of the International Organization for Migration laid out the legal rights and duties of migrants and governments and finally Maurizio Malogioglio of the Food and Agriculture Organization explained how the importance of remittances.

The four councillors gave their experiences. Madisson Godoy, himself from Ecuador spoke about how the Latin American diaspora contributes to politics at “home” and in the adopted country. Tetyana Kuzyk from the Ukraine talked about role of women – the majority of immigrants for eastern Europe are women and her surprise that Italian women only got the vote in 1946. Victor Okeadu from Nigeria addressed the broader qualities needed for leadership and Romulo Sabio from the Philippines (with a first name like that, his destiny was obviously sealed) explained how a toothpick could become a symbol of office – when the council votes the hundreds of amendments to the annuale budget, the majority has to vote no each time so before the divisions, the group leader distributes toothpicks to jam the “NO” button on the voting panel. As the adjuncts have no vote, that toothpick took on the significance of a royal mace or sceptre. Fabrizio Molina from the NGO “Nessun Luogo è Lontano” showed what political leadership can achieve and Giuseppe Casucci from the UIL’s Migration section explained what the labor movement can do for migrants. And we ended with a workshop prepared by my colleagues Isabella Clough Marinaro and Bjørn Thomassen and myself.

In the distant past, the Empire had non-natives at its head – three of the greatest emperors were foreign born; Trajan in Iberia, Diocletian in Illyria and Septimius Severus in Tripolitania. The Roman Church was rigorously Italian in its leadership from the 16th century until John Paul II but the new Italian nation was formed with the help of Garibaldini from all over the world and one prime minister, Sydney Sonnino had a Welsh mother.

There have already been some naturalised Italian members of parliament but usually by marriage. At the moment, there is one deputy originally from sub-Saharan Africa and one originally from North Africa. With luck there will be more very soon in the Chamber and in the city council.

Revived Rituals of the Bel Paese

Once upon a time in a republic far, far away, every year or so the natives went through a fascinating, time consuming and very baroque rite to decide which of a restricted group of tribal elders should be chief for the next 11 months. Occasionally it took a week or so, other times up to four months. Soothsayers spent hours observing the auguries to try and predict the future leader; the entrails of many birds were examined (and the rest of the bird ritually eaten in specially designated temples or osterie or sometimes trattorie surrounding the sacred mound – Monte Citorio – where the public phases of the selection process took place).

No, it was not the papal election which in comparison is simple, straightforward and apart from one notable exception is quick. The exception was an almost three year conclave between 1268 and 1271 but they adjusted the system and have had no serious problems since.

This was the so-called government crises of the “First Republic”, the system of government that ran Italy from the war (or to be precise, from the 1946 referendum which introduced the republic) until 1994. It was dominated by the Christian Democratic (DC) party assisted by the Socialist Party from the ‘60s onwards. Because of the Cold War, obviously the Communist opposition could not alternate in power in a NATO country so the DC stayed in power for the whole period. It was dubbed “the imperfect two party system”. The DC was a catch-all party going from clerico-fascists on the right to christian socialists on the left with a lot of personal factions in the middle.

These jostled for power – usually positions but occasionally policies by intimating (there were almost no explicit votes of confidence) that they no longer supported the prime minister of the moment. The crisis was normally little more than a re-shuffle of ministers and undersecretaries to reflect the changing power relationship between the factions and it was acted out in a stylised way rivalling Japanese Noh theatre.

If you haven’t lived through the period or studied it, what is happening today is difficult to follow but it mimicks the old ritual.

Then, after a prime minister realised he no longer had the confidence of the houses, he would “go up the hill”, the Quirinal where the President’s palace is, to hand in his resignation. The president would then consult with all the political parties including the smallest and most marginal, and with his predecessors. Then, usually, he would give a mandate to the outgoing PM to form a new government. The prime minister designate would do the rounds, offer jobs and policy measures to see if he could build a majority. If he failed, the president would charge another, normally DC, leader who would do the same.

Over the consultations, there would be sweepstakes opened in all the papers on the chances of this or that candidate making. Political insiders were consulted on their dark arts and darker knowledge.

In exceptional circumstances, he would invite a non-political figure to form a “technical” government with ministers either from across the spectrum as with Ciampi in 1993 or with no party attachment as with Dini in 1995 although Dini himself was an outgoing minister.

Over the last few days there has been a stream of visitors at the Quirinale from opposition and government parties. They look suspiciously like the consultations of the old days although of course Napolitano is at pains to say that they are “informal”.

At the moment the medium long odds are still on Mario Monti to lead “a President’s Government” (a new term) of technocrats supported by most of the parties but there is some talk of Berlusconi’s eminence grise, Gianni Letta taking over a political government with support from enough of the opposition to guarantee a majority. Increasingly, phone in shows have people saying “why doesn’t the president get rid of Berlusconi and give the job to someone else”. All well and good, but the President doesn’t actually have the power to do so until Berlusconi steps down.

But in the meantime, he’s making contingency plans just in case…

The substance of the present crisis is a long, long way from the “First Republic”. The financial crisis is real and the issue of confidence vital for Italy and Europe. Whereas the First Republic prime ministers were part of a carousel and knew that they would be back as cabinet ministers, Berlusconi is fighting for his political life. And whereas old crises could play on for weeks or months, Belgium style, and the country continued steadily, this one is for real and at stakes is the economic future of the country.

Last night, the cabinet passed a major amendment which they promise will become law by the middle of the month. There is no wealth tax but the promise to sell off public property is there and some employment stimuli. There are measures to accelerate the civil law, way overdue but not something which will produce short term effects. Even if the whole amendment becomes law, it will not change Italy’s economy from one day to the next or even the perception of the economy.

The chances of it becoming law are decreasing hour by hour as more and more one time Berlusconi faithfuls are leaving the sinking ship. There is open bickering once again in the cabinet between Berlusconi and Tremonti. The next crunch will be the markets tomorrow and on Monday, the spread between German and Italian bonds; and that other crucial index, the government’s majority in Parliament which sinks as the spread expands.

“Euro” or “Ero”

As always, Giannelli is sharp and elegant and this time prescient. A few months ago, the Corriere della Sera cartoonist drew a skeletal version of Leonardo’s human figure on the one euro piece with the caption “ero” meaning “I was” – instead of “euro”. Giannelli’s day job used to be at Italy’s oldest bank, the Monte de Paschi di Siena so his insights into the financial crisis are very much to the mark.

We haven’t quite reached the point that Italy will have to leave the euro but with every day that passes, the possibility becomes less fantastical. That the situation is serious in not in doubt; this morning there was a show of unity from all the independent and centre-left papers calling for Berlusconi to resign. Even the family papers called for action with the oversize court jester, Giuliano Ferrara headlining his editorial in Il Foglio “Cavaliere, do something!”

Yesterday in the middle of the All Saints holiday, Giorgio Napolitano published a letter calling on the government to act. This is the closest a president can get to removing the prime minister. He appoints the prime minister but has no explicit power to sack him; Italy’s president is a largely symbolic figure but he does have some residual powers which come into play when all else fails… like now. Napolitano is pushing the bounds of presidential propriety but as one of the few institutional figures with consistently high approval ratings, Napolitano has obviously felt that he has to act if the government won’t. He is already consulting with opposition leaders as if there was a government crisis. But he can do no more than encourage even if he is backed up by most Italians.

Employers, the church, trades unions and not surprisingly, the opposition all want to see Berlusconi go; his approval ratings hover between a fifth and a quarter. Abroad, his fellow heads of government have gone as far (or further) than protocol allows and first Trichet and now Draghi have made the ECB’s position clear. Van Rompuy and Barroso have made their position explicit as well.

But Berlusconi supporters reacted on Monday to suggestions he should step down by saying that it was the Italian people who choose the prime minister, not the German or French governments. Up to a point… the British changed their leader in May 1940 without elections under pressure from Germany and France, there is no reason why Italy should not do the same today under their this time benign pressure and mutual self-interest. An economic Churchill figure wouldn’t be a bad idea.

Berlusconi, though, shows no sign of being prepared to step down. Minister of Labour, Maurizio Sacconi tried to raise tension by suggesting that there will be terrorist violence to stop liberalisation of job security laws. No doubt there will be more attempts at black bloc violence and it is just possible that some unrepentant individual exiles from the ‘70s might try something but there is no violent subculture ready to sprout into terrorism.

The Minister for Programme Implementation, Rotondi made a not-so-veiled threat to possible wavering support among backbenchers when he said “everyone in the PdL is in Parliament because of Berlusconi – they know that if they don’t vote for him, they will not be re-elected”.

Tomorrow the G20 meets in Cannes and the EU summit follows. Greece’s vote of confidence will create some flutters in the euro but the main problem is now Italy and intrinsic to Italy is Berlusconi.

There are two possible developments. The most direct and constructive is that Berlusconi gets the message and resigns when he gets back from Cannes “for the good of the country”, Monti takes over with an interim government going from Di Pietro on the left to Fini on the right taking in all of the PD and the PdL less Berlusconi diehards.

On that side there is general agreement that there should be a wealth tax and real pension reform, not just old age pensions but those available to anyone who has more than a certain number of year of contributions. Rhetorical and divisive measures like changing the Workers’ Statute to allow easy firing should be dropped. It is an inflammatory measure and irrelevant as companies in difficulty can already lay off workers. Monies raised should be spent on growth promotion measures to raise the GDP and lower the percentage debt.

At the opposite extreme is that the government passes a decree law with a few of the less crucial measures requested by Europe and offered in Berlusconi’s letter last week. It is pushed through with votes of confidence but neither markets nor other international organisations take it seriously enough to reduce the spread between German and Italian bonds; at the same time Greece goes into full default and Italy is next in line. Followed by more partial measures too little, too late with a collapse of government and Italian finance some time in the Spring.

The middle line is that Berlusconi holds on till January and then goes for Spring elections but a lot can happen over the next two months.

At the moment, I tend to the pessimistic option; this afternoon there are more discussions on what sort of measures to take – the government and PdL have been talking about these since August and however serious the crisis seems to be, there always seems to be time to talk and procrastinate. Berlusconi is meeting with party leaders in the afternoon and the cabinet this evening. The measures should be included in a bill which is already before Parliament.

The measures might include yet another tax amnesty (Tremonti is very much against it), sale of public property (but it is not clear if they know how much there is and what price to put on it) and above all, little or nothing for growth.

The Italian Government between an Irresistible Force and an Immoveable Object.

Or put more simply, Berlusconi is still between a rock and a hard place. After all the hype over the last week about “last chance for the euro”, for Europe, for Berlusconi and his government and the apparent solution, what has actually happened? Here in Rome or in Brussels, Paris and Berlin?

This time there is a real risk of the government falling from the pressure of the European institutions and internally from doubting allies. The fall has been predicted so many times that I might be crying wolf but this is the most serious so far. Berlusconi once again told the world that his government is solid until the end of its 2013 mandate immediately after the all-night session with euro member heads of government and has repeated the mantra since coming back. It is just… just, possible that he will make it – Berlusconi is one of the world’s most stubborn politicians able to resist multiple storms but the odds of his making it to 2013 lengthen by the day.

The irresistible force is the European Commission and Council which gave Berlusconi clear orders to take immediate action to reform the Italian economy; the immoveable object is Umberto Bossi and the Northern League who refuse to accept any radical changes to Italian pensions.

Early Thursday morning, the European institutions accepted Italian government reform plans avoiding an immediate crisis; now the ball is back in the Italian court. Very little of the plan to the EU that is actually new – the proposal to raise pension ages to 67 by 2026 became law earlier this year or can be guaranteed to raise real income in the coming year – selling off public property is a risky business especially in a country where real transparency in public accounting is still a long way off and which in any case has little money; and nabbing tax evaders is a great idea but but not something that can be banked on in next year’s budget. Changing the law to make it easier to lay off and fire workers has already brought a reaction from the unions with demonstrations in Rome on Friday.

The first market reactions on Thursday were positive both on the Italian plan and the broader plan to support the euro and European banks. But on Friday the Milan stock market took the heaviest losses on the continent and Italy had to offer more than 6% on its 10 year bonds, the highest ever.

It was a very short relief period. Berlusconi is once again out of control verbally denigrating the euro at the same time as the EU and ECB are supporting Italy. He said on Friday that the euro is “a peculiar currency which has convinced no one” only to say he had been misquoted a few hours later. This is hardly the behaviour which inspires confidence. Antonio Politi brought in Aesop’s frog and scorpion story to explain Italy and the EU; the scorpion begs the frog to carry him across the river only to kill him in mid stream, drowning himself. “Why have you poisoned me?” asks the dying frog. “Because it’s my nature” replies the drowning scorpion.

Quoting Aesop ennobles Berlusconi’s incompetence which is muddle rather than tragic destiny. But we get the point.

The only positive result of the Prime Minister’s remarks is today’s reply from Mario Monti where the former European Commission and present president of the Bocconi University analyses the euro’s role and Italy’s need for it and suggests that Berlusconi work to give the euro some binding rules. The letter is respectful and professorial in tone but with little respect in substance; it is another indication that he might be a candidate for prime minister of a technocrat, non-political government. Last week he was the guest on Lilli Gruber’s “Otto e Mezzo” and finessed the question about his candidacy – previously he had kept well out of that possibility. If anyone can show some political leadership combined with skills as an economist sufficient to put Italy back on track, it might just be Monti.

It certainly is not Berlusconi closest ally, Umberto Bossi, the leader of the Northern League. Bossi is fighting hard to prepare his party for elections next year and to maintain his own leadership in the party. He stopped any serious pension reform – the biggest cost of pensions are people who can retire early after a certain number of years of contributions. When the Speaker of the Chamber, Gianfranco Fini reminded viewers that Bossi’s wife had retired at 39, there was a brawl in Parliament between his and Bossi’s supporters the following day. On the same day, the government lost two divisions; these too are not signs that inspire confidence.

On top of it all, the 15 page letter replying to the European Commission and Council Presidents request for an Italian plan was not countersigned by the minister for the Economy, Giulio Tremonti, neither formally nor in any public statement.
Little wonder that both Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy showed their scepticism over Italian reliability very visibly last week. Their smirks

were institutionally inappropriate but devastatingly telling. More than anything else the scene shows “sovereign” states are far from sovereign. The smiles also showed that the problem is with the leadership, not with the substance of the Italian economy and finance which are weak but not as catastrophic as market reactions suggest.

The danger is that the government will continue its muddle, not face either Europe or the League by which time we will all be in the middle of the river. The more hopeful scenario is that Berlusconi will have to demand more votes of confidence and Bossi finally pulls the plug…

Wanted – grownups – desperately

The other evening I was talking to an Argentinian who gave me graphic descriptions of their 2001 crisis – not the default and the financial side which is fairly clear in an abstract sort of way, but the social side. He explained that just about everyone had to go down a rung or two or more on the social ladder. Not a pretty sight and even less pretty to be part of.

But of course it can’t happen now… and can’t happen to us. Can it? Well, something similar is happening in Greece. But the rest of us are safe… there are lots of clever people in charge and some of them know what to do. After all, in this one, we’re all on the same side, aren’t we and they’re grownups, aren’t they?

The present crisis is, or should be, different from other blights which try society from time to time. Natural disasters are just that, natural and we understand the corruption or incompetence which accentuate the damage and suffering caused by an earthquake or tidal wave. Those involved in conflict whether on the battle field or in politics think that they will win and even when we condemn their motives or methods we know why they do it.

Today, no one will profit from a collapse of the euro and a prolonged recession in Europe and North America. Certainly not those who lose jobs, savings or businesses; not the mainstream politicians who just look ineffectual and will lose to some radical populists riding the recession tiger. Even the much reviled speculators, bogies blamed for all our woes, do not want a total collapse. They can make a lot of money on severe short term losses as George Soros did in 1992 when the pound went down with his help but over the medium and long term, growth will give them many more possibilities for profit. So this time, we all have the same interests it would be nice to think that there were some grownups who could save us.

As children, the grownups do actually take charge and most of the time, they stop us falling down holes, electrocuting or poisoning ourselves or doing all the dangerous things that infants love to do without realising the consequences.

Here in Italy, no one expects very much – the Berlusconi-as-Nero caricature is working overtime at least in the foreign press; by now, most Italians do not even grant him the stature of a Nero style villain bunga-bunga-ing while the euro and the Italian economy burn.

Those who should be acting as grownups for Italy do not either because they do not have the power to sanction, like the ECB which can only advise and cajole or because it would be diplomatically unacceptable which is the case with Merkel and Sarkozy who cannot be seen to be giving orders to a fellow head of government of a sovereign state. With an Italian as the new head of the ECB there is a better chance of some of the advice being taken as Mario Draghi is not only a very competent banker, he also cannot be seen to be soft on his own country. The ECB and the French and Germans have been pleading with the Italian government to implement public spending cuts and growth encouragement measures at least since August but Berlusconi happily tells the world that there is no hurry.

We also know that the markets like stability and clarity and here again, the government is squabbling over who to appoint at governor of the Bank of Italy to replace Draghi (who was appointed to the ECB in June) . The Prime Minister’s main worry at the moment is pass a law preventing the publication of telephone taps which are already part of the court’s public evidence (it is already illegal to publish taps which are not part of the public court documentation).

It was only in July that Berlusconi and economy minister Tremonti admitted that there was a crisis here – before that they assured us that everything was fine. Now it is not just Italy which is at risk but the whole euro. If the euro were to collapse, it is unlikely that the other European, political institutions would survive and certainly not in their present form. This is a doomsday scenario which would make Argentina look mild but the fact that it can even be made explicit is cause for serious worry.

The only way to avoid it is for there to be a radical change in the direction taken by European leadership but as George Monbiot argues, “Governments and central bankers now have an unprecedented opportunity to learn from the catastrophic mistakes they’ve made. It is an opportunity they seem determined not to take” .
Soros who knows more than most about financial crises argues that there must be a new agreement among Europeans which gives more power and funds to the Commission “a European treasury with the power to tax and therefore to borrow. This would require a new treaty, transforming the EFSF into a full-fledged treasury” and it should be done quickly “Once the principle of setting up a European Treasury is agreed upon, the European Council could authorize the ECB to step into the breach, indemnifying the ECB in advance against risks to its solvency”. He concludes ominously “That is the only way to forestall a possible financial meltdown and another Great Depression”.
So if we cannot find the grownups, we will be looking to a new version Brother, can you spare a dime. Worse, we might be looking at the end of the EU.
Merkel has already told us not to expect too much from the Sunday summit and Sarkozy is gooey about his daughter… the prospects are not good.

Flames in Rome

The most shocking aspect of Saturday’s riot in Rome was the fact that it did not come as a shock. For 10 years now in Italy, at least since the violence at Genoa’s G8 in 2001, there has been the strong possibility of protest marches being hijacked by relatively small numbers of very well organised, well prepared thugs.

It happened in Rome last year after the 14 December vote of confidence and for the whole of last week, all the papers were talking about the likelihood of violence on Saturday. I have no special sources but from very public ones, it was obvious to warn my American students wanting to show some solidarity with the “Occupy Wall St.” protest to be very careful as there were plenty of signs that something nasty was going to happen. As it happened, they were careful but they did come back with some good primary material for the course on political violence…

Yet both the organisers and the police had made no plans to deal with what was a very effective takeover of the whole demo. Most Italian demonstrations have their own servizio d’ordine, a group of people from the organisers who see that none of their own people cause trouble. Trades unions and more established protest movements have a long experience of managing crowds and acting as buffers between the demonstrators and the police or public. This time the organisers very explicitly had no internal security. When the violence began, there were many spontaneous attempts to contain it but mostly they didn’t stand a chance against well prepared and disciplined spoilers. One 52 year old tried to stop a gang starting on a bank, and lost two fingers from a hand; in another area, there was the paradox of the usually radical and anti-police, anti-establishment left wing Cobas getting help from the celerini, the riot police normally their antagonists.

On the other side, the different police forces were badly prepared, low on morale and in the wrong places. It could hardly have been worse. The close control and divisory tactics that other police forces have developed were not used on Saturday. There is footage of carabinieri, police or finance guards (the three main national police forces, all of whom were present), standing around in the midst of the melée uncertain of what to do next. Like other police forces, though, the Italian ones have had to deal with swingeing cuts in their budgets and like the British at least, they have been accused of being heavy handed in the past (and some suffered either financially or in their careers) so many were afraid of being too aggressive. Finally, the majority was deployed around the sensitive areas in the centre (Parliament, ministries, Berlusconi’s residence) rather than with the demonstrators so that when the violence began there were no police.

Those were the tactical errors. There have been much more longterm mistakes made too.

It is axiomatic that economic hardship increases social tension and might lead to violence. Some politicians and commentators have been warning government of the dangers for months. Antonio Di Pietro and the deputy and journalist Furio Colombo clamour like Cassandra. The response has been to accuse them of encouraging violence.

The clear message from the demonstrations across the world was that banks and governments had either misbehaved or been incompetent and that the young in particular were not prepared to give up their futures for others’ crimes or stupidity. Their expectations have been crushed and they are angry.

But on Saturday all the demonstrations apart from Rome were peaceful and here, the vast majority was peaceful and furious that a few had stolen the show.

Those few are usually referred to as the Black Block as if it was a single organisation. They aren’t – they are small numbers of mostly young people, mostly male who use left wing usually anarchist rhetoric and fascist methods. They use black block techniques developed and tried in Germany and elsewhere over the last 25 years; according to one interviewed in La Repubblica this morning, they have used the Greek unrest as a training camp. Wherever they learnt, they are extremely effective. Calm and unworried as they hack away at armoured glass or a police vehicle; prepared by donning protective clothing before beginning the mayhem and by leaving caches of molotov cocktails and ball bearing or paving stones – the ubiquitous sanpietrini which can be used as an instantly available missile in most of Rome; careful to destroy CCTVs and warn off cameramen but also sometimes oblivious of the hundreds of cameras around.

Those who are able and prepared to use the violence seen on Saturday are quite able to use more serious violence in terrorist attacks and we can only hope that law enforcement agency will be capable of dealing with the symptoms and more importantly, that government agencies are prepared to address the underlying causes and work with the majority on non-violent protesters.
Not very likely, I fear. The Interior Minister, Roberto Maroni was the only member of government who made a public appreciation of the non-violent protest. The new head of the European Central Bank (and until the end of the month head of the Bank of Italy) Mario Draghi said before the violence began that the protesters had a point.

But the rest of government tried to put all the blame on “the left”. Berlusconi did not go as far as saying that Bersani, Vendola and Di Pietro, the leaders of the main centre-left parties, were responsible but the innuendo was there – and no doubt will continue. Anything to move attention from fundamental economic difficulties.

They will return to the surface soon enough – but so will the prospect of political violence.

The Zombie Government

While the rest of Europe is worrying about the possible implosion of the euro, Berlusconi is once again marshalling his forces for a vote of confidence tomorrow.

The reason this time is a combination of a disintegrating coalition and sloppy parliamentary management. The government was defeated on Tuesday on a division on article 1 of last year’s budget account. This should be and normally is a formality; it would only be controversial if there were suggestions that the books had been cooked which there aren’t. The money has been spent after all, and Parliament has to approve the account. Instead the article was turned down by one vote which means that the rest of the bill cannot be discussed.

The Italian system does not have whips so there is no one whose job it is to see that parliamentarians actually turn up to divisions and with a good majority this is usually not a problem (even though they have lost quite a few votes over the last few months). On Tuesday there were two key ministers (Tremonti and Bossi) who arrived late for the vote (the Chamber votes electronically with deputies at their own places) despite being in the building. An ex-minister Claudio Scajola who had had a long meeting with Berlusconi that morning also did not turn up.

Berlusconi called the defeat a “technical hitch” but it is much more serious than that. According to the constitutionalist, Michele Ainis, the government has put itself in a catch 22. It cannot re-present an identical bill for six months and it cannot change an account which has already been closed. And without the previous year’s account approved, the government cannot move on to this year’s. President Napolitano has said that the Prime Minister must sort out the puzzle so there will be some sleight of hand by lawyers and accountants in order to allow the ship of state to keep spending. It is just possible that the president will not accept whatever solution is presented, but unlikely.

That is the form and the letter of the law. On the substance, the defeat was yet more proof that the coalition is disintegrating. An increasing number of parliamentarians in Berlusconi’s Popolo della Libertà (PdL)(People of Freedom) would like him to step aside and let someone else run the country and the party until the elections and his ally, Umberto Bossi and the Lega Nord (LN)(Northern League) has said explicitly that the government will not last till 2013. This morning Berlusconi gave a 19 minute speech explaining why he was going to continue and that Tuesday’s defeat did not count. Bossi was sitting next to the prime minister and his body language was most eloquent – he couldn’t stop yawning.

His probably successor, the Interior Minister, Roberto Maroni, went and sat on the LN benches rather than his ministerial seat, another very explicit move.
The right wing commentator, Marcello Veneziani wrote about “leaders who hadn’t died and babies who haven’t been born” this morning (in one of the Berlusconi family papers). He pointed out, rightly enough, that reports of Berlusconi’s political death have been much exaggerated, for the last 333 days, he said (but he could have said for the last 17 years). And he points out that despite the many proclamations, the opposition leader has not been born yet. Also true. He does not add, though, that both facts are to the utter detriment of a country which is in serious economic trouble and risks dragging the rest of the euro zone down with it.

Veneziani and some other courtiers like the editor of another family paper, Il Foglio, Giuliano Ferrara do indeed criticise Berlusconi but from the role of court jester; none of his political associates have the courage to act decisively enough to end the misery. He is like a bull in the ring, weakened by the picadors and made angry by banderilleros but there is still no matador.
It is a zombie government, not clinically dead but close to being brain dead, lurching from one crisis to another, golem-like and out of control. Worse, actually, because Berlusconi is very much alive to his own appetites and aversions.

If Berlusconi loses the vote of confidence, he will have to resign but knowing his stubbornness, he will try and put together a new government. Some of the opposition and some of the majority too would like to see a “technical” interim government to see Italy through the acute moment of the financial crisis but there is no consensus yet. The other alternative is early elections.

My own guess is that he will win the vote tomorrow but that the next crisis is just round the corner and the chances that this government will run its full term to 2013 are decreasing by the minute. But I might be proved wrong tomorrow. Either way, spring elections are more and more likely and the overall prospects are not good.

Ghosts of the Past, Politics of the Present in Spain and Italy

On Friday I went to El Valle de los Caídos, Francisco Franco’s massive monument to himself, to Catholicism and in theory, at least, the dead (caídos) of the Spanish Civil War. Its size is impressive, half hidden, half visible for miles around a fitting metaphor for Franco himself. The visibile part (for 40 km) is a 150 m. high cross whose arms are 46 m., supposedly the largest in the world. Hidden from the outside is the basilica cut 260m into the mountain’s solid granite, a tribute to the more than 20,000 workers, mostly the forced labour of Republican prisoners of war who made it.
The magniloquence of the work is mindboggling – under any circumstances, it would have been extraordinary; it is all the more so as Spain in 1940 had been devastated by the civil war and was trying to survive in a Europe which itself had just begun to tear itself apart. The decree starting the works proclaimed it was to be a monument “to perpetuate the memory of those who died in our glorious crusade” and to the “Victory” (the decree is republished without a hint of irony on a Francoist site describing the Valle de los Caídos a “place of peace and reconciliation”). Franco believed that the “crimes” of the Republicans could be “redeemed by work”, a sinister echo of the Auschwitz motto Arbeit macht frei.
He very consciously compared himself to Philip II and his own monument in the nearby El Escorial, built in much more prosperous times. The imagery is mostly Catholic with the mysteries of the rosary adorning the huge entrance crypt and a mosaic day of judgement in the cupola above the altar, but the nave is guarded by four hooded figures on either side, hinting at crusading warrior monks but actually representing the three armed forces and the fascist Falange militia. The founder of the Falange, José Antonio Primo de Rivera is buried there on Franco’s orders and when Franco died, he too was buried there.

There is no doubt as to the monument’s message.
For 30 years after Franco’s death in 1975, it stood as a very visible reminder of a past which Spain was uneasily coming to terms with. On Franco’s deathday in November, a few, mostly elderly supporters would come and commemorate the Caudillo but the monument was hardly a focus for a Francoist revival.
Then in 2006, the present government passed the Ley de Memoria Histórica, the law of historical memory one of whose effects was to close the Valle de los Caídos as a “political” monument. The intention was to close it completely but since it contains a church, the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom kept it open. So as we drove into the park surrounding the monument, we had to assure the wardens (state employees) that we were going for the 11 o’ clock mass (a sung mass, by the way, which makes full use of the cavern’s amazing acoustics). No one checks to see that one is praying but there is a certain confusion over what exactly the place is for.
Spain, like so many other places has a problem digesting its past.
By chance, Friday was also Yom Kippur, the day of Atonement for Jews and one way in which human individuals come to terms with their past and make amends to their fellow men for their misdeeds. All societies have some mechanism for dealing with individuals’ past and many are highly institutionalised but we have not yet worked out how to deal with our collective past; most attempts are pretty messy, Italy and Spain particularly so, but in very different ways.
Mussolini’s birthplace, Predappio, is a pleasant little town in Romagna apart from the sale of Fascist souvenirs (until 2009 when it was banned though it continues online) and the pilgrimage to Mussolini’s tomb complete with honour guard. Both the Fascist junk and the paraphernalia around the tomb are or should be illegal since just after the war when antifascist Italy created the crime of apologia del Fascismo (defence of Fascism). But few have been prosecuted for it and no one convicted.
Predappio and the other shrines to a regime that was both murderous and seedy are extremely disagreeable in a western European democracy and in an ideal world should not be there all. But we are not in an ideal world.
Recently two Neapolitan artists suggested closing Mussolini’s crypt but no one seriously suggests using the 1952 law to do so. It would almost certainly create a backlash which would boost fascist nostalgia.
The issues of the memory of Franco and Mussolini are very different. Franco was overall much more canny; he allied himself to the Roman Catholic Church and said he fought in their name while Mussolini was at best a pragmatic supporter of the Church and vice versa. Franco carefully avoided World War II while Mussolini jumped in with both feet… and lost; with the result that Franco died in his bed an old man recognised if not respected by the whole world while Mussolini was killed by partisans and reviled by all but his most diehard supporters.
Despite a massive building programme, there is no monument to Mussolini apart from the few small ones erected in his life time most of which were destroyed immediately after the war. The family chapel in Predappio is no more grandiose than thousands of others across the country.
So all in all, the softly-softly approach to Mussoliniana is probably the right one, politically and morally although the revisionism by some right-wing politicians is distasteful and dangerous. It is not the best solution but it’s probably the least bad.
In contrast, dealing with Franco’s physical legacy or the memory of any fascism with the law is surely a mistake. El Valle de los Caídos is too big to ignore – short of using tons of dynamite, it is going to be there for a long time and it is part of Spanish history and unlike the Mussolini family crypt, it belongs to the Spanish state. The memory of fascism can only be digested with history – an accurate account of the past critically analysed and presented in a way which is understandable to all.
Criminal law can and should be used to address today’s manifestations of fascism – racism, intolerance, political violence and authoritarianism – not to lay 70 year old ghosts.

The Power of Referendums

Referendums are an arcane branch of politics; electoral systems even more so – combined they are normally as stimulating as a valium-camomile cocktail. But once again, Italy is different and yesterday’s news that the promoters of an election reform referendum managed to gather more than 1.2 million signatures is news indeed, and of much more interest than Berlusconi’s latest Montenegrin “fiancée”. If passed the referendum would abolish the very unpopular electoral law (nicknamed “porcellum”, a multiple pun I won’t try to translate, but the sense is close to “pigsty”or what is in one) in which parliamentarians are in practice nominated by party bosses

. There are immediate consequences which change the political agenda, the power relationships between the parties and the public perception of politicians and politics in general. And then there will be medium term consequences on how (and who) Italians elect to Parliament. Referendums are one of the few forms of direct democracy that we have in modern societies. Apart from the Swiss who have them on everything from putting in a new pedestrian crossing in a tiny village to weighty national matters of religious freedom, most of the rest of us use referendums sparingly as they can easily become a bludgeon in the hands of expert and well-funded populists. De Gaulle changed France with plebiscites bypassing the other institutions. California worries that powerful lobbies and interest groups can use the referendum to further sectarian interest. Italy’s founding fathers recognised some of the risks and ringfenced referendums. The first was not even in the constitution – in 1946, Italians voted in favour of a republic over a constitutional monarchy. Then they drew up the new constitution which allows referendums in only two circumstances. The first can repeal or confirm a constitutional amendment passed with less than a two thirds majority. The second and much more common referendum can be used only to repeal (not propose) existing ordinary legislation and in any case, key fields are excluded: budget matters, international treaties and amnesties. In order to call for one, half a million signatures have to be collected in three months and for the result to be valid, more than half of the registered voters have to cast a vote. This type of referendum lay dormant for 25 years until conservative elements in the Church and the Christian Democratic party (DC) had the bright idea of using it in 1974 to repeal the newly passed divorce law. The initiative backfired badly with 60% voting against repeal and began a season of civil rights reform spearheaded by the Radical Party (PR) using mainly the referendum or threat of referendum to legalise contraception and abortion, liberalise drug laws, reform family law, and reduce and then abolish military service. As well as being a direct instrument of change, the threat of a referendum was often enough to put an issue on the agenda and push through a reform like the legalisation of abortion in 1978. Along with the major factors which changed Italy in the early ‘90s (end of the Cold War, anti-corruption trials and the debt), the 1991 and 1993 referendums which changed the electoral systems were an important catalyst. Then in the 2000s, those who wanted to maintain the status quo realised that the best strategy was to rely on low turnout to avoid a quorum. It worked until this June when when Italians voted on three referendums producing resounding quorums and showing once again that a majority was so fed up with the political classes that they would have voted to have sunrise in the west if the government was against it. The 1.2 million signature deposited yesterday are proof that this tide is still flowing, and strongly. To reach half a million is not difficult but to more than double the figure is impressive and presages a very high turnout and massive ‘yes’ vote if and when the referendum is held. The next stage is for the Court of Cassation to check the signatures’ validity. There is no doubt that the half million threshold has been reached. Then in January, the Constitutional Court will pronounce on the legal validity; they will almost certainly accept it. Then, if there are no early elections next spring, Italians will vote the referendum. In the meantime, all the parties have to decide what to do. It is a truism that referendums are divisive. Angelino Alfano, the People of Freedom’s new secretary and Berlusconi’s designated successor wants to avoid that division; instead of defending an unpopular law, he would like to change it so that there would be no referendum. While his ally, the Northern League’s Roberto Maroni has said he’s in favour of the referendum even though the law which will be repealed was drafted by a party colleague, Roberto Calderoli who also wants reform rather than repeal. It is decision time for the opposition too. The Democratic Party (PD) (and it’s predecessors) has always been lukewarm on the idea of direct democracy and this time made little effort to gather signatures apart from Arturo Parisi who almost left the party in order to gather signatures. Now the PD support it. Other opposition parties, right, left and centre support the referendum led by Di Pietro’s Italy of Values (IdV) and Vendola’s Left, Ecology and Freedom (SEL). There is little chance of changing the law before April so the government finds itself between a referendum rock and an early election hard place. The only way to avoid the referendum is to have early election. In the midst of a financial crisis and prime ministerial sex scandals, there will be little time for an electoral reform debate. Which is a pity as the electoral system determines the style and texture of a democracy. The present fixed proportional representation party lists allow the party to determine who is elected and cuts any direct link between voters and the elected representative. There is a majority premium for the winning coalition in the chamber. If the referendum passes, Italy will revert to a mixed system with 75% of deputies elected in single member, UK or US style constituencies/districts and 25% from fixed party lists. Voters will have a much bigger voice in who represents them and will at least know who it is. But for the moment, it is all politicians who are considered fair game, a bit like lawyers in some other countries. On that score, have you heard the latest Sicilian politician joke? The Regional Government paid one of its employees 200 hours overtime in August… to clear snow. And, you’re right, it’s not a joke.

Padania – inventing a nation. Frankenstein Jnr in northern Italy.

More than 2,400 years ago, Plato observed that every nation needs a foundation myth and described how it might be done, and a lot more recently Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger in The Invention of Tradition analysed some of the lies and half-truths that most of us use to create our national identity. So we’ve had a long time to understand the dark art of nationbuilding.
Even so, watching Umberto Bossi’s crude antics aiming at manufacturing “Padania” is surprising and more reminiscent of Frankenstein (Junior)’s efforts to create life than the 19th century British enhancement of Boudicca or the German glorification of Herman/Arminius.
On Friday, Bossi performed the “traditional” late summer ritual of taking an “ampolla” (a flask to you and me) of water from the source of the Po. According to Bossi, this is a druidic rite (and the “Padanians” are Celts as we all know) honouring the great river god that gives life to “Padania”. The origins of the ancient tradition are lost in the mists of time of the mid-1990s. When he was in better health, he would carry the bottle down the length of the river stopping on the to milk the crowds and with equal ceremony pour it into the lagoon in Venice… uniting “Padania” – geddit? This year he just managed the beginning and the end of the trip.
The whole charade is weird patchwork of very visible spin and PR mixed with the genuinely traditional Italian propensity for a walk and picnic on a pretty hillside in late summer – the scampagnata.
The previous week was taken up with another attempt to graft “Padania” onto another real Italian tradition – the bicycle race. We had the first (and probably last) Giro della Padania with real cyclists albeit most were past their prime. It was won by Ivan Basso, former Giro d’Italia winner from Varese like Bossi. Once again, “Padania” was being symbolically united by the race except that it was greeted partly with boredom and partly with protests.
The “Padanian” identity is constructed on a supposedly Celtic heritage; the area was after all called Cisalpine Gaul by the Romans, Gaul on this side of the Alps for us Romans, and was largely inhabited by Celtic Gauls. But like Transalpine Gaul on the other side, it was then invaded by Germanic tribes – Franks and Lombards to name just two that gave their names to the places they occupied. Since then, there has been a lot of coming and going in the Po valley which is neither ethnically nor linguistically very pure… it’s true that the League’s leader in the European Parliament has the nickname Obelix because he looks like Depardieu fatted up for the part and that another leader the rubicund Roberto Calderoli could pass for a plump and florid Irishman (but also Englishman or German for that matter).
While the French make a world famous cartoon strip of their Celtic-Gaulish heritage or call their cigarettes Celtiques or Gauloises, Bossi has made a political party and his own very successful career.
In a country where local identity is stronger than almost anywhere else in the world and where many of those identities are based on former political unity or present linguistic or gastronomic unity, “Padania” does not feature as one of them. Most define themselves first as “Piedmontese”, “Sicilian” or “Tuscan”, “Sienese”, “Venetian” or “Neapolitan”; no one seriously thinks of themselves as “Padanian”.
The League’s other symbols also show the magpie tendency of filching anything that glitters and some things that don’t. Their green is a shade somewhere between Ireland and Qaddafi’s Libyan flag – maybe geographically appropriate given the position of northern Italy but not what they are trying to suggest. Their symbol, supposedly "the alpine sun"

looks more like a call for legalising weed – not part of their programme either. When the leaders stand together in solemn moments, their right hands cover their hearts, a quintessential American gesture, not a Lombard (or Piedmontese or Venetian) one. In insults too, they have followed the American example with Bossi frequently raising his middle finger

(most recently towards the Italian national anthem) rather than using the much more athletic Italian and French gesture of putting the left hand on the crook of the right elbow and sharply raising the forearm.
As for music, the Northern League has appropriated one Italian symbol though. From its first performance in 1842, the Hebrew slaves’ chorus in Nabucco was taken as a call to freedom – initially from Austrian domination and then more generally for the whole of Italy. For a time in the 1940s, there was the suggestion that it should become the anthem of the new Italian republic. Now the Northern League use it sing of liberation from Italy much to the annoyance of supporters of Italian unity and Verdi fans..
For the last month, Bossi has again been using the language of secession. In the mid and late ‘90s the party programme moved between wanting a completely independent state (their telephonists at the Chamber of Deputies answered the phone with “Lega Nord, Padania Libera”) and the division of Italy into a three republic confederation. The difference is that Bossi and some of his colleagues are now ministers of the Republic of Italy and have sworn to defend its interests.
Over the summer, they combined unity and secession in a single gesture; the four ministries run by leghisti were transferred to Monza just outside Milan. Never mind that they still have not been staffed and opened and never mind that the other regions of the north were left out. It was Bossi’s devolution equivalent of the secessionists’ military exploit some years ago when a few of them “invaded” Venice with a tractor dressed up in sheet metal to look like a tank: an empty sham, thankfully.
The secessionist rhetoric is actually a superficial inconsistency. The real construction of Padania is a non-starter. Instead, Bossi and his supporters are defending themselves against internal attack – a possible takeover by his rival, the Interior Minister, Roberto Maroni. The physically and politically ailing Bossi wants to consolidate his position within the party. Outside the party but within the centre-right, he wants to distance himself from Berlusconi and the People of Freedom, ready for elections not later than 2013 but very probably sooner. During the Po water ceremony, he pointedly made no commitment to supporting the government for another 18 months.
So despite all the noise, we’re more likely to see an indepenent Scotland or Catalonia than “Padania” but that won’t stop Bossi’s rant.

Not even a perch at the victors’ table

Every Italian schoolchild knows that the Piedmontese prime minister sent troops to fight with the British and French in Crimea in the hope that at the end of the war, Piedmont would have a place among the powers to negotiate the peace settlement. Not for the last time, the Piedmont’s and then Italy’s crack bersaglieri were playing diplomats more than warriors.
In the event, Piedmont took its place at the Paris peace conference and forged a new and strong link with France. Cavour negotiated a deal which led to French support against Austria and the unification of Italy under the king of Piedmont. Cavour and the bersaglieri served their king and country well.
More than 150 years later, Italy has been once again fighting side by side with the French and British, this time much closer to home, in Libya. And this time, the Italian contribution was crucial; without Italian bases, the NATO effort would have been much more difficult; Italian aircraft played an important role and the navy even more so.
Much more importantly, Italian interests are closely intertwined with Libya for both oil and gas and development contracts. Libya is also a former Italian colony (the invasion began 100 years ago this month) with much of Tripoli and Benghazi looking like La Spezia. Today it is the principal stepping stone for irregular immigration into Italy from sub-Saharan Africa (with migration control used by Col. Qaddafi as a carrot and stick).
And yet, for the moment at least, Italy has reaped fewer benefits from its support of the rebels and the National Transition Council than Piedmont did in 1856.
On Thursday, Sarkozy and Cameron performed a good revival

of the Entente Cordiale and yesterday Recep Erdogan

showed Turkey’s contemporary diplomatic muscle rather than rekindling their former Ottoman glory. Next week is President Obama’s turn to do the victory parade with the Libyan leader at the UN. Along with the heads of state and government, the diplomats and businessmen beaver away with less pomp and photocalls but more substance.
Where is Italy in all this? The embassy has re-opened and the foreign minister, Franco Frattini has assured Italians in his usual stunningly banal manner that all is well. Berlusconi is far too busy trying to persuade Chancellor Merkel that he did not make disparaging and sexist remarks about her and that she should be prepared to use German euros to buy Italian debt. He would like to show the money markets, the ECB and the European Commission that his latest budget really is going to rein in the Italian debt.
He is also trying to keep his ever more wobbly coalition together as voter confidence in him, his party and his ally the Northern League plummets.
Most importantly, he and his lawyers are in emergency damage control mode to try an prevent the flow of revelations that suggest that he has been at the centre of a massive prostitution ring and is being blackmailed by the pimps and quite a few of the girls.
This means that he does not have time to go to Tripoli in order to try and establish a new relationship with Libya – it would certainly never be quite as chummy as the one he had with Qaddafi but there could be solid working relations based on mutual interests. Even if he did have time, he could certainly not find space on any of the flights going into Tripoli at the moment. Even his once good friend Erdogan presumably wants his company like a hole in the head. Ditto Obama, Sarkozy and Cameron none of whom have had a soft spot for Silvio.
Despite all Berlusconi’s boasting about the success of his personal foreign policy, he risks not even being offered a stool at the victory banquet.
PS. An undenied report of a couple of months ago suggests that a consignment of weapons confiscated from Serbian forces by NATO in the ‘90s and given to the Italian army for destruction, were not destroyed and left their deposit in Sardinia in June for an unknown destination. If the weapons went to the NTC, the delivery could have been public as Italy had already recognised the provisional government. If they went to Qaddafi forces, we would have the curious scenario of weapons (some of them heavy) confiscated by NATO being supplied by a NATO member to be used against NATO forces. If true, it could be one reason why Italy is keeping such a low profile and not just because of Berlusconi’s whoremongering.

They don’t get it…

Italian politicians have a pretty high opinion of the themselves on the whole. They are furbi or cunning, and are, after all, the heirs of the inventor of modern politics, Niccolò Machiavelli and no one is sharper than him…
The self-congratulatory Berlusconi has declared himself the best prime minister Italy has ever had and has rated himself on par with Justinian and Napoleon as a lawgiver. His colleagues are no less modest.
But they are now dangerously distant from the national and international reality. For the third time in two months, there is an emergency austerity budget before Parliament – this is yet another attempt to inject some confidence into the Italian economy; like the others, it will be very painful for all taxpayers and especially the poorer ones.
As part of the belt-tightening move, Parliamentarians cut some of their allowances in an early draft. The version that the Senate passed on Wednesday and that the Chamber is likely to pass this coming Wednesday reduced that reduction so we’re almost back to square one. And since the Government called for a vote of confidence on the bill, there no possibility of amending it.
The proposal to abolish the provinces (Italy has four levels of government to most other countries’ three) has been tabled as a constitutional amendment meaning that even if this legislature runs its full course, the amendment will not have the time to be passed.
Cutting Parliamentarians’ perks, allowances, pensions and salaries will not solve Italy’s debt problem. Even drastically reducing the number of politicians at all levels will not bring Italy’s debt down to the euro norms but addressing the questions will make it just a little bit easier to persuade the rest of the country that the austerity measures are fair. But the politicians don’t get it.
Four years ago, Gianantonio Stella and Sergio Rizzo published La casta (The Caste) documenting politicians’ privileges in painful detail. It became a bestseller and the title has become normal usage. Over the last few months, revelations and bitter criticism have increased. One summer example: lunch in the Senate restaurant costs less than €10, a plate of turbot €2.50 served in a delighful Baroque dining room by elegant waiters…
Parliamentarians are also given a generous pension after just a single legislature ostensibly to guarantee that they do no abuse the position of power that they held. And even very eminent older politicians have been vehemently defending this precious guarantee of democratic righteousness.
More important on the international scene is the government’s stubborn unwillingness to accept that Italy is in the middle of a major crisis and one which risks seriously damaging the euro, possibly even destroying it.
The president of the employers’ federation, Emma Marcegaglia said last week that the government should act or let someone else do it. The Milan stock exchange has been in free fall for almost two months.
The European institutional leaders have also been putting pressure on both President Napolitano and on the government. These last few days have seen the publication of intercepts between Berlusconi and a fixer-pimp who is alleged to have been blackmailing the prime minister which apparently include disparaging sexist remarks on Angela Merkel, one of Italy‘s potential saviors. This is juicy stuff but even if the language is presumably less graphic, I would be far more interested in the conversations between the ECB’s present and future presidents, Trichet and Draghi and Chancellor Merkel and in what they have been saying to Napolitano. The Italian president, after all, is not responsible for the budget and strictly speaking is overstepping his institutional powers when he urges the Prime Minister to act decisively.
It is relatively easy to explain why the parliamentarians are so arrogant in their defence of privilege. First, they are indeed out of touch with their electorate; they are elected from fixed party lists and not directly from a defined constituency or district. The second reason sounds absurd but is still true; the majority of Italians are not yet angry enough with la casta to do anything concrete about it. Twenty years ago disgruntled Romans threw coins at Bettino Craxi to show their contempt at his venality. This has not happened yet.
As for the government, the explanations are more nuanced. Berlusconi has two contradictory spins. The first is that there was no crisis until a couple of months ago and even now, the Italian economy is actually sound. Nothing has changed dramatically in the financial or business world since July, except that now the markets no longer feel that Italy’s debt is secure; the dastardly speculators are wrong according to Berlusconi. But blaming the markets is like blaming the thermometer when you have a temperature. Berlusconi doesn’t get it.
His second explanation is that he didn’t create Italy’s massive debt, as he repeated just yesterday, it was the catto-comunisti, the Catholics and the Communists in the ‘80s. It was actually his friend and protector, Bettino Craxi more than anyone else who made Italy’s debt balloon out of control (and sponsored Berlusconi rise). And he can hardly claim he is the new kid on the block who has to clear up the mess left by a predecessor, like Enda Kenny in Ireland or David Cameron in Britain, or even Papadreou in Greece.
Italian growth has been low or even negative for almost 20 years now and Berlusconi has been in power for all but two of the last ten years.
Then there are the personal and electoral reasons; Berlusconi finds it impossible to deliver bad news and harsh measures because his popularity is more important than the country’s or Europe’s interests. This is for psychological reasons as well as for obvious electoral interests. His allies even more, are terrified of facing an electorate after cutting resources.
They also have an underlying presumption that “it’ll all turn out all right in the end”. This is part facile optimism and part the idea that there are “grown-ups” in “Europe” who will sort everything out. “We’ll raise the pension age but only if Europe tells us to” said Berlusconi a couple of days ago.
The problem is that Italy’s mess is too big for “Europe” (Commission, ECB and Germany) to sort out without a major effort by Italy itself.
But they don’t get it.