On the first day of the European Council in Brussels, which ends today, Tempo analyzes the scenario with Stefania Craxi, senator of Forza Italia and President of the Foreign and Defense Commission of Palazzo Madama.
It is a particular Council, because it takes place on the eve of the European elections. How did the Union get to the summit?
«It is a delicate situation, not so much due to the electoral deadline but due to the international context. Of course, the improvident outbursts and escapes forward by some European leaders on the Ukrainian conflict, like the meetings that evoke an anachronistic regurgitation of a Europe of “power hierarchies”, in this situation a demonstration of weakness rather than strength, do not the good of Europe nor do they help to find the necessary solutions.”
There is an issue that is starting to hover, the “Trump factor”. To what extent should the EU fear a disengagement from the United States if the tycoon wins the elections once more?
«Trump or no Trump, I don’t think the US can imagine, also by virtue of its strategic interests, a disengagement from the global scenario. Behind every crisis, even if it takes place in distant quadrants, lies a match between the main international players. A different theme, which transcends the tycoon, his strong and anything but diplomatic declarations, is that of a Europe which becomes an actor and which also raises the issue of the costs of its security”.
Are you referring to NATO financing?
«It’s a problem that the United States has been asking us for some time. An issue which especially the European entities belonging to the Atlantic Alliance are called upon to deal with and which does not contradict, but rather strengthens, the prospect of a common European defence”.
Doesn’t the use of extra profits from frozen Russian assets to financially support Ukraine risk further distancing the possibility of a negotiation?
«I don’t believe so. If anything, the space for a negotiation would become even further away when Moscow perceived a weakened and abandoned Ukraine. It is a circumstance that would lead Putin to raise the bar and the price. And in any case, at a time when it is not easy to find resources to support Kiev in the defense of its territory, it is an option that should not be excluded. So much so that it is a hypothesis also being examined by the G7 under the Italian presidency.”
In the domestic debate, the left is driving a wedge on Salvini’s words on the Russian elections to denounce splits in the governing coalition. Does the center-right’s common vote on the issue really cover everything?
«The votes are an incontrovertible fact, they demonstrate that in practice the majority moves together much more than people say. Of course, some statements that are anything but acceptable should be avoided so as not to generate misunderstandings. And, if you allow me, they should also be avoided by a certain opposition which, behind a formal pacifism, leers and sends ambiguous signals to internal and external worlds.”
Middle East scenario. Here too, the possibilities of a truce do not seem to exist at the moment. What might be a keystone?
«October 7th is a watershed. I believe it is difficult to hypothesize a truce without simultaneously imagining an followingmath, without indicating a security perspective for Israel and a path that leads to the construction of a recognized Palestinian state entity. And for this reason, an effort by the moderate Arab world is fundamental, supported by some Western countries – Italy might play a great role – without which it is impossible to find solutions”.
#fashionable #pacifism #ambiguous #signals #Tempo
2024-03-25 03:37:53
