Month: February 2013
All planes to Mogadishu are full
SAIS master’s student Solvej Krause reports:
A Georgetown University event last week brought together civil society representatives from Somalia, US-based nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that operate in Somalia, and a US State Department representative to discuss recent developments in stabilization and statebuilding in Somalia. The tone of all four speakers was surprisingly optimistic. “All planes going into Mogadishu are full,”said Abdurashid Ali, who runs an NGO based in Minneapolis and Garowe, Puntland. State Department officer Rob Satrom said that for the first time he is getting calls from US-based Somalis wanting to move back to Somalia. The panel agreed that the formation of the new government and the election of President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud are reasons for cautious optimism.
Speakers
Abdurashid Ali, Executive Director, Somali Family Services
Eric Robinson, Senior Program Officer, Horn of Africa, National Endowment for Democracy
Steven Hansch, Relief International, Board Member, Professor at GWU
Rob Satrom, Somalia Desk Officer, State Department, Bureau of African Affairs
Background
For the first time since the collapse of Siad Barre’s dictatorship in 1991, the US government officially recognized the Somali government in Mogadishu in late January 2013. President Hassan Sheikh met President Obama in Washington last month, a sign of the strong US support for the burgeoning governance structures in Somalia, the former “failed state” poster child . The Somalis on the panel spoke of the current period as “the end of the transition period” in Somalia, even though in many respects this is only the beginning.
Official recognition by the US means that Somalia is now eligible to receive development assistance from USAID and other development agencies. Without an internationally recognized government, Somalia has long been unable to receive any direct governmental development assistance. Somaliland, the autonomous and largely peaceful region in Northern Somalia, suffers the same fate. Its politicians frequently complain about the lack of recognition by the international community. But the chances of recognition of Somaliland as a sovereign state are now lower than ever, despite the region’s remarkable success in stabilization, the development of robust trade links to the Gulf, and a shift from clan-based politics to multiethnic democratic governance.
Steven Hansch from Relief International traced the history of US humanitarian involvement in Somalia. The US began delivering food aid to Somalia during the Ogaden War in 1978. In 1992, following a devastating famine in the Horn of Africa, the US intervened launched “Operation Restore Hope,” originally a military intervention on humanitarian grounds. But once the intervention was under way, the mandate shifted to governance. In 2009/10, food aid to Somalia was interrupted and foreign aid workers had to be evacuated because of a dangerous rise in kidnappings of foreigners. The anti-terrorism agenda in Somalia often got in the way of the humanitarian agenda. Hansch believes Congress must to revisit the Patriot Act to ensure that anti-terrorism objectives do not prevent the delivery of food aid. Other points made by Hansch:
- There is currently a big debate among governments and NGOs about the role of the UN in Somalia. A proposal to unite the different UN agencies into one integrated mission is on the table. This move is meant to improve the efficacy of the UN’s humanitarian and stabilization work in Somalia. Hansch is strongly against this proposal because he does not want humanitarian aid to get caught up with the UN’s more political functions. This is also the view of the UK, which wants to keep the different branches separate, while the US is formally for integration. In Liberia, the UN led an integrated mission. According to Hansch, it was a complete disaster.
- The situation of Somali refugees in Kenya is precarious. There were more than 976,000 refugees in Kenya and Ethiopia in 2012. The Kenyan government recently announced its intention to round up Somali refugees and send them to camps. Is this a matter that UNHCR should handle or should the US government act?
Rob Satrom from the Somalia Desk at the State Department said that the previous US-backed government (the Transitional Federal Government) was largely operated out of Nairobi and widely regarded as corrupt. In 2012, elections in Somalia could not be held due to instability. The number of members of parliament was reduced from 550 down to 250. To the surprise of everyone, the former president of the TFG was not reelected. Satrom called the new president Hassan Sheikh Mohamud a “pretty credible player.”
- Since 2007, the US has provided a little over $400 million in assistance to Somalia. The US government is keen for Somalia to develop a more professional national army. But the USG does not provide any funds directly to the Somali government, because leakage, corruption and diversion of funds pose a huge problem.
- Satrom stressed the destructive role of Al Shabaab, an Al Qaeda-linked militia, during the famine last year. The group banned 18 organizations from delivering food aid in the country. Satrom believes that this is one of the reasons why the Somali population has turned against Al Shabaab. Until one year ago, Al Shabaab carried the day but today the tables have turned.
Eric Robinson is half Somali and works for the National Endowment for Democracy, a Congressionally funded organization founded by President Reagan in 1983 to promote democracy abroad. NED invests $1.1 million in projects in Somalia – South, Puntland and Somaliland. He stressed that democracy cannot solely be viewed as an end in itself in Somalia: “…democracy has to deliver. People want to see service delivery. Somalis have seen other people do things in their country. They’ve never seen Somalis doing things in their country.” There is huge resentment towards the UN in Somalia due to its failure to provide stability and provision of ineffectual projects. What matters most for Somalia now, is “delivering things that aren’t conferences or UN compounds,” said Robinson.
- Turkey is getting a lot of credit for the development work they do in Somalia. According to Robinson, this credit is deserved, but he adds that it is easier for Turks to operate inside Somalia than for Americans or Europeans because of their shared religious beliefs and greater cultural affinity.
- One of Somalia’s biggest problems right now is corruption. “Billions are stolen with impunity”, says Robinson. But establishing rule of law and security means that ministries have to be trusted with money. Robinson called for a new “on the fly” audit mechanism to verify how money is spent.
- Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Johnnie Carson’s ‘Dual Track Policy’ to engage all Somali political actors as long as they are not supporting Al-Shabaab did not deliver. The impact of the policy is not felt on the ground, says Robinson.
- Puntland is moving forward with municipal elections. They do not want sovereignty, according to Robinson. New political associations are being formed in Puntland and Robinson is curious to see whether they will be multi-clan or single clan. He recommends caution: “There is no way they are ready for one person, one vote by May.”
- It is getting safer in Mogadishu and it is getting more dangerous in Somaliland, particularly around Burao. Many Al-Shabaab leaders are from southern Somaliland and they are getting pushed back into Somaliland. There is an Al Qaeda presence in southern Puntland. The problem with Al-Shabaab is that the traditional clan-based rules of protection based on diya (blood money, trading captured people between clans) are “out of the window”.
Abdurashid Ali is the executive director of Somali Family Services, an NGO based in Minneapolis and his native Puntland. For the first time in Somalia’s post-1991 history, he says people are hopeful about the future. Somali expats are returning to Mogadishu where the security situation is improving. “All flights into Mogadishu are full.”
- Negotiating with Al Shabaab as a political group is not an option for Ali.
- He is skeptical about building a national army from Mogadishu because this would inevitably empower one clan over another. Central government funds should be distributed to all regions.
- Federalism is the answer to Somalia’s governance problems. Ali calls clan politics “a cancer.” Using the clan to get to power is not the answer. Clan politics are not going anywhere in Somalia. We have learned that.
- Ali criticizes those who say that “traditional” (i.e. clan-based) forms of politics should be accepted as the norm and believe that democracy does not stand a chance in Somalia: “Who the hell does not want to have a stake in his life? Who does not want a say in how he is governed?” Who does not want a say in how he is governed?” He notes that the clans were used by Western colonial powers to mobilize people in Somalia.
- Demobilization is one of the hardest challenges in Somalia today. Members of clan militias who were given AK 47s and left their nomadic lifestyle have nowhere to return to.
- He is excited to see a multi-clan leadership of a new Puntland party. The question is whether the elected representatives will surround themselves with their own clan members or commit themselves to multi-clan, multi-party democratic politics.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Textbook cases
Nathalie al Zyoud, a master’s student at SAIS, reports on Tuesday’s presentation here by Bruce Wexler, Yale professor emeritus of psychiatry and principal investigator for the Council of Religious Institutions of the Holy Land study “Victims and Our Narratives,” a study of portrayal of the “other” in Israeli and Palestinian school books.
School books shape attitudes about others and a sense of one’s own community, identity and homeland. These views are often reflected in the public statements of community leaders and are reformulated as accusations by each side in public debates. Textbook narratives can also promote rather than obstruct peace.
While Palestinian authorities were very receptive to the project, Israeli authorities refused to engage in the research.
The multi-confessional research team created a standardized method to rate the content of State-run secular and religious institutions using a curriculum approved by the Israeli Ministry of Education, as well as independent ultra-orthodox Israeli schools that used their own school books, the latter attended by 25% of Israeli children.
Between 1948 and 1994, Palestinians were restricted from creating their own educational material and used Jordanian and Egyptian textbooks under the supervision of the Israeli Ministry of Education. After the Oslo accords, Palestinians were given the authority to create their own school books. So the study looked at the Palestinian curriculum in public schools, attended by 76% of Palestinian children, private schools, and schools run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, which all used the same textbooks. Islamic institutions, attended by about 800 students all together, were omitted from the sample because they used Jordanian school books. The study did not examine religious books. Scientific and mathematics books were also omitted.
The Team had a 93% agreement rate between examiners and very high inter-rater reliability.
The study found that, as to “characterization of the others,” Israeli state schools in general had more literary descriptions about the other then Palestinian school books. When characterizations did occur; Palestinian and Ultra-orthodox Israeli school books had more pronounced negative and very negative depictions of the other. Israeli state school had more positive references about the other.
|
Negative |
Very Negative |
Positive |
|
| Israeli State school |
23% |
26% |
11% |
| Israeli Ultra-Orthodox Schools |
39% |
34% |
7% |
| Palestinian Schools |
23% |
50% |
0% |
When raters examined the content of very negative language for terms that dehumanize, or demonize the other, they found that most textbooks primarily characterized the other as the enemy when they used very negative language.
|
Dehumanizing traits |
Demonizing traits |
Zoological traits |
Characterized as the enemy |
|
| Israeli State school |
6% |
1% |
0% |
75% |
| Israeli Ultra-Orthodox Schools |
12% |
0% |
0% |
56% |
| Palestinian Schools |
0% |
0% |
0% |
81% |
Looking at the characterizations about the actions of the other, the same pattern occurred: there was less negativity in Israeli state books.
While narratives depicting events about the other were not necessarily deemed false, schoolbooks opted to depict the negative truths about the other rather than highlight the positive truths. This has the potential of creating expectations about the behavior of others. When positive acts were mentioned, they referred to individual actions of the other, rather than group actions.
When textbooks portrayed the self-community, the opposite trend was noted, although in the Israeli state curriculum there was also a fair amount of self-criticism that was absent in the other school systems.
Few references were seen to Christianity in Israeli state schools, almost no references about Christians in Ultra-conservative Israeli schools and slightly more positive characterizations in Palestinian texts. Both Israeli and Palestinian school books depicted each other’s religion in neutral terms.
Photographs in Palestinian school books completely ignored Israel and focused on pictures with meaning to Palestinians. Maps in school books were indicative of the current territorial conflict: 95% of Palestinian maps did not mention Israel. In Ultra-conservative schools 95% of maps had no borders and 65% of Israeli state schools also used maps without borders. The only Palestinian schools to have maps with borders and labels were UNRWA schools.
Once completed, the research team sought to promote the study’s findings and disseminated the results broadly within both communities. The results triggered a lot of criticism, particularly from the Israeli Ministry of Education (MOE), despite the results depicting Israeli textbooks in a slightly more positive light. The Israeli MOE felt that hatred was incited elsewhere in Palestine and deemed the study biased, unprofessional, and significantly lacking in objectivity. The Palestinian Prime Minister, in his public statement, expressed satisfaction that the study confirmed that Palestinian textbooks did not contain blatant provocations, but committed to a full review of the state’s textbooks.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A new map
Professor Ian Lustick of the University of Pennsylvania thinks Israel needs a new map, as the old Zionist one is unsuited to its current circumstances, but he gave only general indications of the contours it might trace at a discussion today sponsored by the Foundation for Middle East Peace and the Middle East Policy Council.
Israel’s Zionist pillars no longer bear weight. Zionism assumed international sympathy for a democratic Jewish state, justified by the Holocaust. That has turned into international sympathy for a Palestinian state. Israel is no longer viewed as the vanguard of democracy, since it inequitably favors its Jewish population. The Holocaust has declined in relevance.
Israel is lost. Even on the left it sees no possibility of the two-state solution, or any other possible and satisfactory outcome. Its citizens live in existential dread, questioning whether the state will survive. It is no accident that the newest political party on the horizon is Yesh Atid: “There is a future.”
The main issue is the West Bank, where the settlements, a big increase in Palestinian population and stalemate in the peace process since before the second intifada has left Israel without a sense of purpose and without viable solutions. Democracy for the Palestinians is inimical to Israel. The tenets of Zionism provide no answer.
Is there a way out of the impasse? There are certainly catastrophic outcomes that are possible and even probable in a highly and artificially constrained situation. But there are also other serious options: a two-state solution that includes a viable Palestinian state with part of Jerusalem, a shareable narrative, generous compensation of refugees, abandonment of nuclear weapons throughout the region, an end to the use of force and removal of settlements, which are bad for Israeli security.
How could the situation be made to evolve in this direction? There is no visible political force within Israel pushing for it right now. Only in the universities is thinking of this sort evident. President Obama cannot do much, due to his own domestic constraints. But on his upcoming trip he might be able to nudge Israel in the right direction. A prisoner release would be a positive step. But it would not be useful to restart the Middle East peace process unless the President is prepared to put serious pressure on Israel by stopping aid.
Palestinian strategy at the moment is separation, boycott and delegitimization (including use of the International Criminal Court). It is a long-term strategy that does not preclude practical cooperation in the meanwhile. It does not require the peace process.
Israel is watching Syria attentively, especially the possible use of chemical weapons and transfers to Hizbollah, but it is not helping Bashar al Asad to hold on or hoping that whatever succeeds him will be an improvement. This is a realistic and moderate posture appropriate to the circumstances.
That was about the only glimmer of light in an otherwise dark picture.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Only Beppe Grillo knows
The Italian elections continue to provide amusement, albeit far from my usual obsession with war and peace. At this writing, not too many hours after the polls closed, the votes are counted. Surprised? This is a bit like waiting for luggage at Fiumicino: the electronic board predicts to the minute when your luggage will arrive, and it does!
It looks as if the leftist coalition of Pier Luigi Bersani has won in the lower house by a very slim margin of popular votes. But the leading party there gets a “premium” of seats that will enable him to wield a comfortable majority. In the Senate, Silvio Berlusconi’s rightist coalition is a couple of seats ahead, if I am to believe the algorithm nerds at La Repubblica. Comedian Beppe Grillo will hold the votes needed to gain approval in the upper house. He can’t make Berlusconi prime minister, but he could make it impossible to form a new government. The far more serious and sober Mario Monti, who so ably steered Italy through the shoals of financial crisis for the past year, will not have enough seats to make the difference. His big real estate tax increase weighed heavily against him.
This is Italy: the leftist candidate is the more fiscally conservative one. The right is much less likely to meet the needs of the financial markets, which is at least one reason American markets fell today on the news (though the impending sequester is likely another reason). Of course this should really be comprehensible in Washington: American deficits rose sharply under George W. Bush and in the first year of Barack Obama but have been declining for several years since. Of course in Italy there is also pressure for government spending cuts. Berlusconi never implemented any significant restructuring during three terms (10 years) as prime minister and isn’t likely to do any better the fourth time around. He could of course overcome the current electoral impasse by offering to join Bersani in a national solidarity government, perhaps even one with Monti as prime minister again.
But he shows as little sign of willingness to do that as to rein in his foul behavior. I’ll be in Rome next month: I’ll be asking how any woman could vote for such a mascalzone. The issue isn’t whether he paid for sex with underage girls. The issue is how little respect he has for women in general.
The key question now is what Beppe Grillo will do. That is the most unpredictable thing in Italian politics these days. To call him an iconoclast would minimize his resistance to paying Italy’s debts and remaining in the Eurozone. To call him a populist would minimize his promises to introduce a 20-hour work week and free internet and tablet computers for everyone. To call him a comedian would minimize the seriousness of his attack on privilege and corruption.
Italy of course has big problems: its mountain of public debt, its slow economic growth, its lagging exports, its aging population, its youth unemployment, its shaky banking system, its corruption, its organized crime and its scandal-ridden church, just to name a few. All of this now falls in the lap of someone who is better known for attracting hordes to V(affanculo) demonstrations than for deliberating seriously on issues of state. His choice is whether to back a former Communist who promises continuing austerity, which isn’t likely to be popular in piazza, or block government formation and push the country to a new election.
I have no doubt what I would choose. The combination of Monti’s sobriety about the budget deficit with Grillo’s passion for rooting out corruption in the public sector could be healthy. President Giorgio Napolitano, a former Communist himself, is likely to favor a left-supported government with Monti at the helm. It is hard to see how Grillo and Berlusconi, who in any event will not have a majority in the lower house unless the cavaliere wins a new election, would do anything more than roil markets with pledges to cut taxes and failure to cut expenditures.
But if Italians agreed with me they wouldn’t have given Berlusconi 30% of the vote. Nor would any Italian who agreed with me have given Beppe Grillo the votes needed to block Monti from finishing the serious work he started. Such are the glories of democracy. The Italians are entitled to, and deserve, the government they have voted for. But only Beppe Grillo knows what that is.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks: February 25 to March 1
A relatively quiet but high quality week:
1. Al Qaeda in the United States
Date and Time: February 26 2013, 10-11 am
Address: Center for Strategic and International Studies
1800 K Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20006
B1 Conference Center
Speakers: Michael Hayden, Robin Simcox, Stephanie Sanok
Description: In recent years, several individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds have attempted to attack the United States on behalf of al-Qaeda. These individuals have defied easy categorization, creating challenges for intelligence, law enforcement, and other agencies tasked with countering their activities. However, with the publication of ‘Al-Qaeda in the United States’, the Henry Jackson Society seeks to provide new insights into the al-Qaeda movement and its U.S. operations by rigorously analyzing those involved or affiliated with the organization. Please join CSIS and the Henry Jackson Society on February 26 for an on-the-record discussion of this new report and the nature of al-Qaeda-related terrorism in the United States.
Register for this event here: http://csis.org/event/al-qaeda-united-states
2. The United States, India and Pakistan: To the Brink and Back
Date and Time: February 26, 2013, 2-3 pm
Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
Speaker: Bruce Riedel
Description: India and Pakistan are among the most important countries in the 21st century. The two nations share a common heritage, but their relationship remains tenuous. The nuclear rivals have waged four wars against each other and have gone to the brink of war several times. While India is already the world’s largest democracy and will soon become the planet’s most populous nation, Pakistan has a troubled history of military coups and dictators, and has harbored terrorists such as Osama bin Laden. In his new book, Avoiding Armageddon: America, India and Pakistan to the Brink and Back (Brookings, 2013), Brookings Senior Fellow Bruce Riedel, director of Brookings Intelligence Project, clearly explains the challenge and importance of successfully managing America’s affairs with these two emerging powers while navigating their toxic relationship.
Based on extensive research and his experience advising four U.S. presidents on the region, Riedel reviews the history of American diplomacy in South Asia, the conflicts that have flared in recent years and the prospects for future crisis. Riedel provides an in-depth look at the Mumbai terrorist attack in 2008—the worst terrorist outrage since 9/11—and concludes with authoritative analysis on what the future is likely to hold for the United States and South Asia, offering concrete recommendations for Washington’s policymakers.
On February 26, the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings will host an event marking the release of Avoiding Armageddon. Bruce Riedel will discuss the history and future of U.S. relations with India and Pakistan and options for avoiding future conflagration in the region. Senior Fellow Tamara Wittes, director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, will provide introductory remarks, and Tina Brown, editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast and Newsweek, will lead the discussion.
3. Democrats, Liberals, the Left and the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Date and Time: February 27 2013, 12 pm.
Address: Georgetown University
37 St NW and O St NW, Washington, DC
Edward B. Bunn, S.J. Intercultural Center CCAS Boardroom, 241
Speaker: Jonathan Rynhold
Description: Prof. Jonathan Rynhold (George Washington University) will present his analysis of the various grand strategies of Democrats, Liberals, and the Left towards the Middle East, as well as elite discourse and public attitudes towards the conflict. He explains the trend towards increasing criticism of Israel and increasing preference for a neutral approach to the conflict. Prof. Rynhold argues this is not simply to do with changes in Israeli policy but deeper changes within the Democratic Party and among liberals in their attitudes to foreign policy and politics in general.
Register for this event here: http://events.georgetown.edu/events/index.cfm?Action=View&CalendarID=349&EventID=101111
4. The Resistible Rise of Islamists?
Date and Time: February 27 2013, 12-1:30 pm
Address: Woodrow Wilson Center
1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
Speakers: Moushira Khattab and Marina Ottaway
Description: Some call it the Islamist winter while others talk of revolution betrayed. Neither claim portrays accurately what is happening in Arab countries in the throes of popular uprisings and rapid political change. The rise of Islamist parties in the aftermath of the Arab uprisings took most by surprise, including in some cases the Islamist parties themselves, which were more successful than they dared to hope. Coupled with the disarray of the secular opposition, the success of Islamist parties augurs poorly for democracy, because a strong, competitive opposition is the only guarantee against the emergence of a new authoritarianism.
Register for this event here: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-resistible-rise-the-islamists
5. Economic Effects of the Arab Spring: Policy Failures and Mounting Challenges
Date and Time: February 28 2013, 12-1 pm.
Address: Middle East Institute
1761 N Street
Speakers: Dr. Zubair Iqbal and Dr. Lorenzo L. Perez
Description: The Middle East Institute is proud to host economists Dr. Zubair Iqbal and Dr. LorenzoPérez for an examination of the economic impact of the upheavals affecting Arab Spring countries, including Egypt and Tunisia. Since the 2011 uprisings, growth in the MENA region has slowed, inequality worsened, and unemployment increased, thus weakening the popular support needed for new governments to introduce difficult, but necessary, economic reforms. The speakers will address the reasons for the inadequate reforms taken by these new governments and the economic consequences of an unchanged policy environment. By focusing on developments in Egypt, they will highlight the economic challenges posed by recent events, strategies to address them and what role the international community can play in helping stabilize Arab economies.
Register for this event here: https://www.mei.edu/civicrm/event/register?id=300&reset=1
6. No One Saw It Coming: Civil Resistance, the Arab Spring and the Conflicts That Will Shape the Future
Date and Time: February 28, 5:30 pm
Address: Johns Hopkins/SAIS, 1740 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
Speaker: Peter Ackerman, Founding Chair, International Center for Nonviolent Conflict
Register here.
7. The 2013 Annual Kuwait Chair Lecture: US Military Intervention in Iraq: Cost and Consequences
Date and Time: February 28 2013, 6:30-7:45 pm
Address: Elliott School of International Affairs
1957 E Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20052
Harry Harding Auditorium
Speaker: Ambassador Edward W. (Skip) Gnehm Jr.
Description: Ambassador Edward W. (Skip) Gnehm, Jr., Kuwait Professor of Gulf and Arabian Peninsula Affairs, GW
The final convoy of U.S. combat forces withdrew from Iraq in December 2011, but the U.S. military intervention produced transformative effects that continue to reverberate in Iraq and throughout the region. On the 10 year anniversary of the U.S. intervention, Ambassador Gnehm will reflect on the costs and consequences of that action on the U.S., Iraq, specifically, and the Middle East, more broadly.
Register for this event here: https://docs.google.com/a/aucegypt.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEJIbXNYazRvODZyakN2aGJTNEFkUFE6MQ
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Banks, Church and government
Son Adam, who spent six of his first eleven years living in Italy, suggested in a Tweet:
Someone needs to do the “no, Italy is actually a healthy, functioning democracy” slatepitch.
That’s because I had suggested something along those lines at dinner Thursday night. He’s right. And I guess I’m the guy to do it.
I served in Italy as an American diplomat 1977-81 and 1987-93, leaving Rome as Charge’ d’affaires ad interim. That means I was a cog in the diplomatic apparatus that prevented the Italian Communist party from coming to power–even as a junior coalition member. But the policy was already fraying when I got to Italy as science counselor in 1977 and joined the cultural and labor attache’s in a palazzo revolt. We could not do our respective jobs without contacts with Communists, which were still reserved for a single political officer within the Embassy.
The revolt was successful in part: two of us were authorized to establish contacts with the Communists. I began talking regularly with the party secretary’s brother, Giovanni Berlinguer. The cultural attache’ (and the Ambassador in secret) started talking with Giorgio Napolitano, now finishing up with distinction his mandate as President of the Republic.
Back in Rome when the Berlin wall fell in 1989, I became deputy chief of mission in 1990 and asked for Washington’s permission to lift all restrictions on the Communist party. The first request was denied, but by 1991 it had been approved. For the first time since World War II, Italy could choose its governments freely without endangering its position within NATO and in Washington.
There ensued more than 20 years of bizarre politics. The left came to power several times to fix the nation’s budget problems, relying in part on competent and tough-minded technocrats. Then Silvio Berlusconi, a populist right winger who captured the imagination of Italy’s many small businessmen, would come to power and end the tough fiscal policies, which naturally had made the left less than well-liked. The net result was a lengthy period of economic stagnation, with Italy’s debt reaching 120% of GDP. Mario Monti, the current prime minister, is the latest in the line of technocrats expected to do the right thing, even though it is not popular.
Monti is struggling in the polls with the buffoonish Berlusconi and Beppe Grillo, a real live comedian whose iconoclasm brings Italians into the piazza. The left, associated with fiscal probity, had been sliding (but polls are prohibited in the final two weeks of the campaign). Italians have had enough of taxes and austerity. They want hard-edged cheer (Grillo is good at that) and growth (which Berlusconi promises but never delivers).
The Italian electoral system is no longer the one that produced revolving door governments during the Cold War. Governments now tend to last a few years. The rules in the lower house favor whichever party gets the largest number of seats with a “premium” of additional seats. But the system in the Senate is different, leading to the possibility of a divided parliament. The European and American press are in a bit of a panic about this, worrying that Berlusconi might return to Palazzo Chigi or that there will be a hung parliament.
But let’s take a step back: what we’ve got here is a free election, if not a fair one since Berlusconi controls most of the private media in the country (and until he left the prime ministry most of the public media as well). Foreigners are certainly interested and even trying to influence the outcome, but no one has a veto. It is a virtue and a privilege to meet financial difficulty through democratic means. I’ll bet Italy manages it as well as Washington, where we already have a divided legislature. Next Friday’s sequester, if it is triggered, will not crown American democracy with glory.
Also concerning are the scandals in two of Italy’s most distinguished institutions: the world’s oldest bank, Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS), and its oldest autocracy, the Vatican. MPS is in serious difficulty, having concealed important data from its supervisors at the Bank of Italy (which then had to provide a big secret loan to tide MPS over). The Vatican faces so far unsubstantiated charges that it harbors a cabal of homosexual cardinals, news of which might be implicated in the Pope’s resignation.
A run on Italian banks would be a really serious problem, one that could once again shake the Eurozone to its core and end the slow normalization that has been occurring in European financial markets. It is far too early to imagine where the Vatican scandal may lead, but at the very least the next Pope will have a major rehabilitation job to do. Banks, Church and government in Italy are all facing serious challenges. I for one am pleased that democratic institutions will be the means by which Italians come to terms with them.
RSS - Posts
