Relations between the USA and Italy travel by autopilot. Never before have we witnessed a silent exchange, which transforms national political decisions into the ratification of superior strategic choices.
The visit of the President of the Republic to Washington follows the recent passage of the President of the Council and the tour with the Secretary of State Kerry in Rome. Two data in relief: the strong US activism in the increasingly apathetic Europe; Italy's adherence to US foreign policy without debate.
With regard to the first evidence, it is recent the news of the next investment of 3,4 billions of dollars to "strengthen" Europe (article). The figure follows the geopolitical evolutions of the Mediterranean and the Old Continent from the beginning of the second decade of the new century: crises in Libya and Syria are lit up in the 2011; in 2014 the one in Ukraine explodes.
American political interventionism, even before military intervention, has accelerated in Europe precisely in conjunction with the new crisis areas.
But precisely because of the diplomatic setbacks in the Middle East (article) since the 2013 the pressure to avoid further false steps has increased. Especially in the year of the presidential election, a period in which capital decisions are never taken historically, Washington cannot help but turn to friends. The USA in Europe can count in particular on three stainless steel axes:
- Great Britain with which it shares political choices;
- the Baltic countries whose anti-Russian feelings they ride;
- Italy, natural aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean.
Given by default the agreement with London, starting from the 90 years between the arrows of the USA there are the Eastern countries. To the dangerous interactions with Kiev, there is the privileged relationship with Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, which became NATO members: fueled by a historical revenge against the former invaders, the Baltic pawns are the thorn in the northern flank of Moscow. It was from the time of the Cold War that there were no air and naval military activities in the triangle between St. Petersburg, Kaliningrad and the Gulf of Bothnia as those of the two-year 2013-2015.
In the East, Poland (toarticle), which despite being a proud member of NATO (the only European country together with Britain to invade Iraq in the early stages of the 2003) is at this moment in the balance between the anti-Russian syndrome and Euro-American-skeptical ultra-nationalism.
Separate discussion also applies to Hungary, which has diluted the unlimited availability of NATO for its 90 years (its airspace was used for operations in Yugoslavia), with the Orban-Putin flirtation.
The Latin front, on the other hand, guarantees the US loyal Italian allegiance, made exclusive even for lack of competitors. On the Washington-Paris axis on the Syrian crisis, in fact, a traditionally skeptical French electorate on NATO and the strong candidacy of the FN at the 2017 presidential elections. France between the 1966 and the 2009 remained outside the Alliance's command (the headquarters was not by chance moved to Brussels from the original Paris) just to brush up on the idea of grandeur, incompatible with each american dream. In this regard, Chirac's refusal to leave for Iraq in the 2003 was hardly offset by Sarkozy's new Atlantic deference.
Italy, regardless of the colors of the governments in charge, is the only country that has never diverged from the lines of its geopolitical subjection, not even through elementary forms of debate. Cases Mattei and Sigonella aside, the margins of Rome have hardly ever concerned the legitimacy or merit of a commitment but only its intensity.
The trend was paradoxically strengthened by the 90 years, when with the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, there would have to have been space for a more autonomous foreign policy.
Instead, Italy has revived an "intervention on call" by ringing more or less direct participations: Deny Flight e Deliberate Force in Bosnia between the '93 and the' 95; Allied Force in the 1999, in NATO's first offensive role against a sovereign state; Enduring freedom became then ISAF in the 2001 in Afghanistan; there Coalition of Volunteers of Bush for the Iraqi campaign of the 2003; Odyssey Dawn in 2011 in Libya.
And it is Libya that returns to be talked about between the Farnesina and Via XX Settembre. Today on the quiet, with every certainty more vigorously in April, when US papers for military intervention will be ready ...
The delay is due to the false start of the national unity government that left the two blocks of Tobruk and Tripoli essentially on the initial positions.
Once a capital and a credible government are identified that are theoretical functions of sovereignty, Italy will have the role of securing the areas around the institutional centers. On the Baghdad Green Zone model, Italy will guarantee the status quo, taking care not to call it war.
While waiting for the US and French presidential elections a few months later, we remain eagerly awaiting new provisions.
(Photo: web)
