ITALY’S POLITICAL SITUATION. HUBRIS AND NEMESIS IN SLOW MOTION

This Article was published by OPEN DEMOCRACY  on April 26, 2013

The Media, both Italian and International, as well as the financial markets, appear to have responded with understandable but scarcely justified  optimism, almost enthusiasm, at the outcome of the  deepest crisis  encountered in the  short history of the Italian Republic (founded  in 1946)..

It has to be said that, by Italian standards, the presidential elections, which took place between the 18^th and the 20^th of April, were not particularly  disorderly: or drawn out:  for example,  one of the most popular of the 11 presidents who have led  post-war Italy – Sandro Pertini – was elected on the  sixteenth ballot, whereas the  re-election of the incumbent Giorgio Napolitano was concluded in six. The  outcome of this electoral process, however, enhances the feeling of decay in the country’s political and social structure, and is bound to have negative reverberations.

Moving at a breakneck pace, the  newly elected  President has  given  the task of forming a “grand coalition” government to Enrico Letta, of the majority  Democratic Party. Should Letta succeed, he would be the youngest Prime Minister in the world, serving under the oldest  Head of State – Napolitano, born in 1925, barely noses out Queen Elisabeth,  1926.

Starting on Thursday, April 18, a body of about 1000 “great electors”,  formed by a joint session of Parliament with the addition of regional representatives began the  electoral process, which, though relatively brief,  has brought about a deep and probably long-lasting crisis in the Italian democratic system.

In the past, the  basic  superficiality of the Italian approach to  political problems had discouraged foreign observers from using over dramatic terms in describing them and  from hinting at the possibility of a tragic outcome: Somehow, at the last moment, the Goddess Nemesis, in her Italian version, had always spared  her intended victim, allowing life to continue without missing a beat.

But the  unbelievable hubristic attitude adopted by the main Political Parties in Italy, as shown on the occasion of the complex procedure devised  for the election of the President of the Republic could well indicate a much more dramatic outcome than what normally emerges from political sparring in Italy.

In spite of the existence of a very unfair  electoral law, designed to muzzle opinion rather than to encourage it, the remarkable, almost incredible, electoral victory of comedian Beppe Grillo’s “Five Stars Movement”,   appeared to give a clear indication  that  Italians had voted for a radical change. Grillo’s “Movimento” emerged as the single largest party in Italy, with almost 25% of the popular vote  attributed to an electorate composed of people of various ages, of different political  provenance and of all professions. It was evident that this very variegated electorate had really had enough of the political posturing which had become particularly  unproductive and sterile during the past two decades and had voted as they did in the hope of  a change.

At first, the  leading coalition, the Centre-Left led by the Democratic Party, which holds an absolute majority in the lower house but not in the Senate,  really seemed to  have  accepted the message and began, albeit sluggishly and with visible reluctance, to  undertake token gestures in the right direction (e.g. pay cuts for Parliamentarians, reduction of  political expenditures, attempted dialogue “outside the box” with Grillo).

The imminent election of the new Head of State, appeared, however, to have reversed these timid  approaches to  innovation, and the most negative aspects of the old secret  dealings  re-emerged with a vengeance. Only Grillo’s Movement, later followed by a minor left wing  party, SEL, acted with transparency and  a  few  very interesting candidates had been nominated through  an online method of selection. There seemed little chance, however, that the voice of Grillo’s electorate would be heard and the two “old” parties, with the addition of  outgoing Prime Minister Mario Monti’s Centrist party evidently coalesced on  the selection of personalities who, by now, are politically  burned out and  by and large mistrusted by the population.

The astounding re-election of an 87 year old veteran politician by a Parliament ostensibly bent on “innovation”, may well buy some time, but is difficult to imagine that a viable, lasting and, above all, efficient Government will be formed in these tense circumstances. Before the end of the year, in all probability,  elections will have to be called and the traditional parties  may well suffer another humiliating defeat, as they did last February, but this time, perhaps, with even more damaging long-term  results.

The choice of Napolitano – the first incumbent  Italian president to be re-elected to a second term - does not, at this stage,  have as much relevance as the method of selection and the consequences of the main parties’ conspiratorial behaviour. The result, though  much acclaimed by the mainstream media,  is far from popular and is being seen  as a product of all too familiar unsavoury back-room deals and will not be respected by the majority of the people. In the current fragile state of Italian political life, this  exercise in political wheeling-dealing while the country is visibly in a state of collapse will be bound to leave   traces and to create a bitter legacy for the future.

The concept of a “grand coalition”,  forcing  a coexistence between two rival parties, can work in some Social  structures – such as Germany – but is unlikely to last long in Italy, especially in the climate of tension and reciprocal  distrust between the two principal rivals (the Democratic Party and Mr. Berlusconi’s “People of Liberty”) which has poisoned the political atmosphere for years and has brought about a virtual paralysis in Government activity. The situation, difficult enough, is further complicated by the sometimes erratic behaviour of Beppe Grillo’s “Five Stars Movement”, which, having emerged as the strongest single party from last February’s election, is in a position to wield considerable weight..

It is what could be called a no-win situation with the principal loser, of course, being Italy itself.

ITALY'S PERFECT STORM

Rome. March 5 2013

THIS ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED BY "OPEN  DEMOCRACY" IN EARLY MARCH. IT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN HIGHLY PROPHETIC, UNFORTUNATELY)

Some foreign publications, in commenting the situation in Italy after the recent electoral results, have reverted to the offensively superficial  and trite image of “bring on the clowns”. The term, however can be used both in a derogatory and a purely descriptive sense, and the one real winner of the election, Mr. Beppe Grillo, being a professional comedian, could be called a “clown” without  causing offence. Politically speaking, however, the  epithet would not apply. Grillo has shown remarkable ability, and has created a powerful  political movement, the  single party which has  received the greatest number of votes (around 25%) from scratch, with no public financial backing, and in the teeth of ridicule at first and then very  violent criticism on the part of almost  all the media. Whether this structure will show itself to be stable and lasting is another question, but it certainly wields decisive  weight at this time. The same publications apply the epithet also referring to Mr. Berlusconi,  mainly because, in their very superficial view of the situation, they consider him as being one of the “winners”, even though his Party has had the poorest electoral result in its history.

The Italian press, perhaps more imaginative and often aiming at a higher  cultural level, has preferred to describe the present political situation with the term “Perfect Storm”, which appears much more suitable.

It would be  wrong to state that  there is no solution to the problems arising from Italy’s recent elections: the art of politics, after all, thrives on the search for unlikely solutions to complex situations, and this has  very often been the case in Italian republican history.  Doubts  can be raised, however as to whether there are any good or lasting solutions to the present situation of chaos.

Italy is no stranger to tense, unwieldy and even potentially dangerous political situations, but never, not in 1948,  when the charismatic leader of Italy’s powerful Communist Party was shot and severely wounded while leaving Parliament, not even  during the terrorist years in the seventies, culminating with the  kidnapping and  assassination of a former Prime Minister has there been a storm as “perfect” as this one.

The elections held last February  resulted in a virtual tie among three political groups which show no inclination of  wanting to work together towards a solution, albeit temporary, of the crisis. Former Prime Minister Mario Monti, had he abstained from entering such a violent, unproductive electoral fray, could have emerged once again as a  presidential choice to lead an emergency government  with the aim of  bringing sufficient stability to enable the Government to continue on its  very controversial path toward reform. As it is,  having suffered a humiliating electoral defeat, he appears to have burned his bridges, and one of the few areas of agreement among the other three contenders is their refusal to envisage any form of cooperation with Monti or his  coalition.

Political analysts , at this point, see only  three possible outcomes:

-          a German style “Grand Coalition” in which the two archenemies, the Democratic Party and Mr. Berlusconi’s “People of Liberty”, both heavy losers in the  recent elections, unite in a majority and form a Government  mandated to solve the  country’s more pressing problems;

-          a “minority Government”, in which the ostensible “winner” of the  elections (i.e. the coalition with  the  greatest number of votes), the Democratic Party, would be  asked to form a Government, having negotiated an unsteady truce aimed at ensuring that the remaining forces in Parliament will not  create a “no confidence” situation;

-          a “President’s Government”, in which, with some analogy to the  Monti experience, and to some precedents in Italy’s recent history, president Napolitano asks an outsider – possibly one of the numerous “elder statesmen”  so abundant in Italy – to form an “apolitical” Government, with the support of both the major  contending coalitions.

The situation is greatly complicated by the fact that president Napolitano, being in the last semester of his mandate,  has his hands tied and is prevented, by the Constitution, from dissolving Parliament and calling for new elections.

None of the above scenarios appear realistic, at least  how things stand now.

In the thirteen months of  Professor Monti’s “Technical Government”, its supporting  majority in Parliament was massive, ensured by the very two parties which would be now called upon to cooperate, and yet  nothing was achieved  outside of the measures imposed by the Government itself.  The result, in electoral terms was the loss of an estimated 5 million votes by Berlusconi and 3 million by the Democratic Party, all to the benefit of Genoese comedian Beppe Grillo’s basically populist “Five Stars Movement”. There never was  a desire to work together, and now, of course, especially after the heavy-handed insults traded during the electoral campaign, the very idea  would appear repugnant to their electors.

A “minority Government”, headed by the Democratic Party, would have to rely on Grillo’ external support, thus allowing him to hold the Democratic Party hostage and perhaps attempt to impose measures totally unpalatable to its more “reformist” members, with the risk of the party splitting into splinter groups. Grillo could also, at any moment, withdraw his support and force new elections.

A “President’s Government” could cause  a veritable upheaval and provoke violent criticism   at the popular level mainly, of course, amongst  Grillo’s supporters, who could  immediately accuse the President (and the “establishment”) of  flouting the Constitution and of ignoring democratic  principles. It could be done, but with scant   chances of lasting success, since it would  be seen as carrying further votes to the Genoese comedian.

Some are putting forward a solution which  owes more to fantasy than to political realism, but this does not automatically exclude it from succeeding.

If president Napolitano, tearing a leaf out of Benedict XVI’s book,  should resign ahead of the end of his mandate (May of this year), Parliament would be compelled to elect a new  President.  Once elected,  he (or, as some would prefer, she) could  undertake a new attempt to form a Government  with the  impending  threat of calling new elections right away in case of failure. At this moment both the leading Coalitions fear  elections like the Bubonic Plague, and could therefore  feel compelled to toe the line. This unprecedented situation, improbable though it may appear, is not outside the realm of possibility.

At the moment, however,  the impasse appears to be total, and the solution, when it will be found,  will most probably only have temporary and unsatisfactory results, leaving Italy's most pressing problems unsolved.

This  indeed  has all the makings of a “perfect storm”.