Let's start from the news: the 23 and the 24 November the Chamber of Deputies hosted a seminar of the Special Group for the Mediterranean and the Middle East, in cooperation with the Italian Delegation at the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. The themes in question, many and of considerable thickness, would certainly have been worthy of more in-depth discussion from an eminently technical and "doctrinal" point of view. The more realistic view of political science applied to international relations has highlighted the peculiar connotations of a more paid forum for subtly political disquisitions than for geopolitical and strategic analyzes. Let us therefore operate, as a practical exercise, the necessary distinctions, keeping in mind the necessary (and apparently very weak in the assembly) the theoretical bases of international relations and political science.
Paraphrasing Clemenceau, for whom war is too serious a matter to entrust it to the military, the relations exposed during the works have reduced the common political thought of today by conferring, by force, the right greater thickness to "technicians", however, culpably confined to a purely academic and restricted sphere; giving the right credit to the assumption of Professor Sartori, sola political science must be relevant, it is not the study of butterflies"Of lepidoptera have been seen in abundance, with the exception of the Lombardi and Strazzari professors, who have confirmed the enviable merit of being able to analyze with complete accuracy - in a period of time granted too short - fundamental and very vital issues for the 'West as it has been understood so far.
La participants' vision The international policy outlined did not objectively investigate the problems nor did it suggest feasible solutions, and the national one remained on a current ideological plane not properly adapted to contingencies. The absence of key government personalities (Defense, Justice and above all Foreign Affairs) confirmed a lack of proactive and effective intentions to be represented at international level, with the exception of what was clearly stated by the Minister of the Interior who, in a politically uncorrect with respect to the trend, he has not feared to outline a worrying but unfortunately true picture of the contingent Mediterranean situation. Whether we wish it or not, the geostrategic essence of the Mediterranean has undergone a profound change which, given our position, can not but involve us; already from the 1991 the Gulf Conflict, coupled with the deep political social transitions that took place in the area, highlighted the importance of Mare Nostrum for the projection of forces in MO and the Persian Gulf both operationally and logistically; the sharpening of the criticalities of security-related aspects, the difficulties arising from the exploitation of energy resources, the marked demographic imbalance with consequent and uncontrollable migratory waves, already led NATO to reconsider Mediterranean theater as the only one but characterized by numerous and complex peculiarities.
A first warning it had already arrived with the explosion of hostilities in the former Yugoslavia, which had highlighted the ethnic and pan-Islamic connections between terrorist acts and organizations operating in an area without state control, with the simultaneous reduction of the distance between the security policies European and Middle Eastern ones. The first "obstacle"Conceptual was given by a misunderstanding multilateralism, however, it was recalled both by Italian political figures and lately by Kehoane, who was obviously not inclined to realistically follow the international dynamics. The Wilsonian line of action, based on a principle of multilateral cooperation that rejected opposing particularities and bilateralisms, found partial success only after the Second World War, but a particularly troubled life with the end of the Cold War. Realpolitik has systematically placed in crisis the principles that are hardly defensible if not in an idealistic perspective: the non-discrimination between members of the system, the indivisibility of the contents of the agreements, and above all the reciprocity of rights and obligations, according to a logic qualitative and not merely quantitative concerning the number of political subjects involved. The callback quality of the concept should have led the Atlantic countries to consider NATO not only from an operational and military point of view, but also and above all from the perspective of a broad political collaboration that, leading to a constructive understanding, did not disregard the maintenance by the 'West of an inalienable historical and cultural heritage, amended negativity that have marked the past work of the Old Continent. Globalization has been understood in a financial sense, a free openness of new markets, and has not taken into account a pervasiveness interpreted as a new form of Leopoldian colonialism, supported by actions that, over time, have highlighted unilateral and supranational characteristics, inspiring uncoordinated and highly destabilizing interventions.
The thought of Professor Sartori - absit iniuria verbis - it has been and is still clear, in relation to the current contingencies: the peaceful integration of a community such as the Muslim, monotheistic and theocratic one, which does not distinguish temporal power from the religious one, is an illusion; Western society, founded on democracy and popular sovereignty, is incompatible with Islam, which is based on the sovereignty of Allah.
How can we still appeal, then, to a frustrated multilateralism interpreted by Middle Eastern competitors in the guise of constant renunciation? Western equality is what characterizes current democracy, so much so that it has allowed us to realize the progressive enlargement of the political - economic base of our society, a mass political democracy with a market economy based on mass consumption; in Western experience, democracy and market have mutually supported on the basis that, good or bad, one relieves and corrects the imperfections of the other.
To date, the West - particularly Europe - is in crisis, plagued by the lack of a truly collegiate political line and capable of directing joint actions, characterized by national unilateralism that can not benefit common causes. Daesh has been defeated militarily, but to believe that the asymmetric threat is no longer looming would be a mistake. There hybrid war has been repeatedly recalled, and probably the first preventive measure should be to control both the very strong impact of jihadist media communication and the return to Europe of a significant number of foreign fighters exfiltered from the Middle Eastern theaters. The radicalization of the conflict, which began with the assassination of Ahmad Shah Massud, the Lion of the Panshir, in September of 2001, proceeds both along real networks and above all via the web, does not stop and continues to show all its virulence; after the ideological and religious superstructure, it finds fertile ground in areas where the "laborers"Terror can be recruited without any particular difficulty due to the poverty and critical conditions in which the masses are poured: Minister Minniti's warning about the concrete risk that among the"migrants"They can hide themselves fighters Islamic is therefore more than real.
The Caliphate, in short, can not yet be finished, especially if one takes into account the fact that the two reality of terror, ISIL and Al Qaeda, come from a single rib, proceed according to different strategies and modus operandi. Where the creation of an Islamic State has institutionalized the Caliphate as Paradise in Earth, al Qaeda has continued to operate with longer-term projects, without having to state its action. In this context, it is also considered an appreciation of the theological aspect of Wahhabi, inspired by the myth of the golden age of the first Islam, which is frustrated with the well-established and poor doctrinal preparation of numerous captured jihadist recruits. In this picture, already so complex in itself, the dynamics involving the Gulf monarchies, Sunni Saudi Arabia, which is experiencing a political moment of rare delicacy, are inserted, Shi'a Iran, animated by a never-willful will of regional power, and the State of Israel; in the background, the new US political course, grappling with a difficult revision of the diplomatic work carried out by the previous Administration.
The interventions of the delegates of the various countries have thus easily brought to light, never resolved that of a multilateral and co-operative, they do not even assume the distant semblance. The hypothesis of a joint strategic action between the EU and NATO, where common interests are often set aside, seems to be currently very difficult. Beyond the (beautiful, charity!) Enunciations of principle, such as that of prof. Burgat, who has even managed to come up with poetical quotations of inclusion in spite of the realpolitik of his country, France, stops in rejecting the migrants, or like Dr. Molenaar's dictated, statistics and hand-to-hand surveys, the migratory, concrete, dynamics of roughly Objective and resolute has been perceived very little. The current rhetoric, incarnated since the introductory reports, raises against the reality of a verbally obscured conflict, but, in fact, tangibly fought. The answers (joint) to be proposed for the resolution of the impasse, probably, go through different paths: an economic approach (belated?) That favors the best sides of globalization, which does not show the soft belly ideology of the West, which does not start from the assumption of necessarily having to offer an attitude perceived as an unconditional surrender and that, above all, takes into due consideration the renewal of the players at the international play table.
It is unthinkable, from a realistic point of view, to look at the dynamics that, wisely conducted, have led the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon to the geostrategic concerned; I did not notice that I did not prepare their cards in order to arrive at the conquest of a post with a significant amount, material and in terms of security; little farsighted to have destabilized an area in perennial boiling with a sort of exported democracy that, at the end of ephemeral springs, has left a political vacuum that, for example, the Saudi and Iranian political subjects are trying to fill with all the risks that this is already entailing.
What has emerged, with realistically clear clarity, was a buckpassing that multilateral, by its very nature, has absolutely nothing. Western politics can be interpreted with the writings of Antonio Gramsci, who made a distinction between common sense e common sense, resuming for this the Manzoni for which "the common sense was there but it was concealed for fear of common sense"; the common sense should push the political community to question what is really going on without being fooled by misleading ideological superstructures; it should common sense, understood as the dominant archetype, induce ad a laborious inertia, made of seminars without objective definitive determinations.
Denial of objectivity in order to avoid having to change valuation tools leads, as it is already the case, to a dissonance between forecasts and reality, making it impossible for real and true appreciation. Always remaining in the purely realistic sphere of the rest, resuming Churchill, in war you do not have to be nice: you just have to be right.
(photo: Presidency of the Council of Ministers)
