First of all, I want to thank Parliament for this opportunity. I gladly accepted the invitation extended to me; I consider the dialogue with the Chambers important, following the confirmatory referendum outcome on the constitutional reform of justice and in an increasingly delicate international context.
EXPECTATIONS AND DISAPPOINTMENTS ON THE REFERENDUM
Before going into the details of what has been done and what will still be done, colleagues, I do not want to refrain from a brief reflection on the Italy handed to us by the referendum vote of March 22 and 23. An Italy that saw great popular participation in the vote and, at the same time, an equally great polarization. A fierce debate, alas not always on the merits, but with a clear outcome nonetheless. And we, as I have already said, always respect the judgment of Italians, whatever it may be, even when it does not coincide with our opinions or expectations.
WHEN TO REFORM JUSTICE?
Certainly, there remains the regret of having missed what we consider a historic opportunity to modernize Italy by aligning it with European standards. Because, colleagues, justice reform remains a necessity. And it is not me saying this, but several representatives of the judiciary and politics, including those who, after predicting every possible catastrophe in support of the NO vote, candidly declared the day after the vote that justice needs to be reformed. That a change of pace is needed, that factionalism is a problem, that the overpowering influence of part of the judiciary is a real risk.
THE ROLE OF POLITICS
That is why the hope I express, even more so today, is that the work on this reform is not abandoned, as some probably wish. Because the problems on the table remain, and we have the duty to find concrete, courageous, effective solutions, preferably in a climate of collaboration. Certainly not against the judiciary, as has been portrayed, but in favor of a judiciary free from political and ideological pressures. And, I add, in favor of a politics that would make a historic mistake if, for tactical reasons, it gave up its role, which is to make laws, including constitutional amendments.
THE REFERENDUM DEFEAT SURROUNDED BY VAGUE CONCEPTS
As for us, our conscience is clear because the constitutional reform of justice was one of the commitments made to Italians when we presented ourselves before them. Like many other things, we said it during the electoral campaign and we did it once in government.
Because this is how we conceive politics. Honoring the profound meaning of the word “responsibility.” “Responsibility” derives from the verb “respondeo,” which in turn originates from “spondeo,” meaning “the solemn act of promising and guaranteeing.” Responsibility therefore means answering to others, not to oneself, and even less to one’s own convenience.
I am not surprised that, regarding justice reform, many asked, “Are you sure it’s in your interest?” Because this is unfortunately a nation that risks getting used to a politics that does not like to take risks, that prefers to survive rather than make an impact, to please rather than take responsibility to truly change things. In this, we may represent an anomaly, but we are proud to represent that anomaly.
That said, I am not here to talk about what has been, but to clear the field of too many fanciful reconstructions and outline what will be.
MELONI SPEAKS ABOUT THE POST-REFERENDUM BUT DOES NOT MENTION THE SPONTANEOUS RESIGNATIONS OF BARTOLOZZI, DELMASTRO, AND SANTANCHÉ
I have been reading, for weeks now, bizarre reconstructions about the consequences of the referendum vote. There is continued talk of imminent government resignations, reshuffles, phase 2, 3, or 4 of the government. Of a restart.
Palace alchemies of a world dear to other majorities, other parties, other presidents of the Council. A world light years away from us, into which we do not intend to plunge Italy again.
There is no restart to be made, given that the government has never stopped and has been working for days, as has been seen, to avert the consequences of the international crisis and to implement other measures. And no new programmatic lines are needed because our programmatic lines have always been written in the government program.
RESHUFFLE? NO THANKS
There is no intention to carry out a reshuffle because, despite all the limits we have, this remains the government that – despite having to manage the worst conjuncture in recent decades – has restored political stability to Italy, international credibility, seriousness in resource management, and economic fundamentals decidedly better than those of past years.
EARLY ELECTIONS? NO THANKS (WITH MANY GREETINGS TO THE RUMORS CIRCULATED BY CHIGI)
As for resignations, colleagues. Certainly, it would probably have been tactically convenient. To call elections to play on the element of surprise, on the division of opposition forces, and in the worst case scenario leave it to someone else to face the difficult months ahead.
That is exactly the scenario the opposition fears most, so much so that it defines this government as a “danger to Humanity” but does not call for its resignation. A bizarre position, from those who evidently flaunt a confidence they do not have.
Do not fear. We have committed to govern this nation for five years, and that is exactly what we will do. No matter how difficult it will be, we are too responsible people to plunge Italy back into uncertainty in the midst of the worst possible scenario.
Italians should know that the Government is here, fully functioning, determined to do its best, even better, until the last day of its mandate. When, once again, it will be at the polls and not in the palace that another government will be formed. We will not run away, we will not retreat, we will not take cover by making citizens pay the price of the usual palace games. We will govern, as serious people do, at peace with our conscience.
We will continue to do so based on the government guidelines I outlined in this chamber on October 25, 2022, when we asked Parliament for a vote of confidence that has never failed since then, thanks to a solid and cohesive majority of which I am proud and want to thank. As well as all the members of the Government who have worked and continue to work tirelessly to build concrete results, starting with my two Deputy Prime Ministers, Matteo Salvini and Antonio Tajani, whom I am proud to have by my side.
WHY I ASKED BARTOLOZZI, DELMASTRO, AND SANTANCHÉ TO RESIGN BUT NEVER NAMED THEM…
In recent days, I asked some government members who had worked well in the exercise of their duties to step back.
These were neither simple nor painless choices, especially for us who remain firmly guarantors, but we once again wanted to put the nation’s interest before that of the party. Because we have no time to waste on endless and pretextual controversies that have nothing to do with government action and end up overshadowing it. That shift the debate from necessary solutions for citizens to controversies useful for parties.
AND NOW?
With the field cleared, colleagues, I challenge you on politics, on real politics. I challenge you to a debate on the merits. On the merits of the international crisis, on the merits of risks to energy supply, on the merits of a Europe that cannot regain real relevance, on the merits of how to shield the economy in an increasingly chaotic world. On the merits of resources, where to get them and where to allocate them. Let’s talk about solutions, let’s see who has them. Because the scenario before us no longer allows anyone to get away with saying it’s all Meloni’s fault. Even the global increase in oil prices.
Italians have the right to know the different proposals on the table because certainly, the government bears the burden and honor of governing, but the opposition should also demonstrate that it can represent a government alternative. That is how a modern democracy of alternation should work and does work.
ITALY’S HISTORIC EURO-ATLANTIC POSITIONING
Starting from the international situation we are experiencing and Italy’s international positioning. A positioning that, it is worth recalling, was not invented by this Government but has been the same for about eighty years. I say this to respond even before the now predictable refrain about my alleged subservience to American President Trump or the even more predictable headline “Meloni must choose between Trump and Europe.”
WHICH EUROPE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
Here too, I will explain my point of view again, but I take the opportunity to ask for some clarification in return. Because Italy’s position in the Iranian crisis was exactly the same as that of the main European countries. So I ask myself, and I ask you, if when it is said that we must stand with Europe, it really means Europe, or rather the European left, even when this means dividing Europe. Because I fear the two things do not go together. I await a confident response.
HOW THE TRUCE BETWEEN THE USA AND IRAN WAS BORN
Meanwhile, as you know, on the night between Tuesday and Wednesday a temporary ceasefire was agreed upon between Iran, the United States, and their respective allies in the conflict that began last February 28. We came close to the point of no return, but now we have before us a faint prospect of peace that must be pursued with determination. Italy expresses its praise to Pakistan’s President Sharif, who took charge of this difficult negotiation, with the support of other regional actors. Now we hope that the peace talks starting in a few hours in Islamabad can strengthen the general points of the agreement and that the priorities Italy, together with its European partners, has supported from day one can find space in them. Likewise, we firmly condemn any violation of the ceasefire.
Permanent cessation of hostilities, cessation of attacks on Gulf countries, cessation of military operations in Lebanon; Iran’s renunciation of its nuclear program and the constant threat to regional neighbors and beyond; full restoration of freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, which must not be subject to any form of restriction, as seems to have happened in recent hours.
THE UNRESOLVED CASE OF HORMUZ
This remains one of the most critical points in the implementation phase of the agreement because if Iran were to obtain the authority to apply extra duties to transits through the Strait, this could still lead to economic consequences and trade flow orientations currently unforeseeable. It is therefore a priority interest of Italy and its European and Western partners that freedom of navigation be fully restored to the conditions prior to February 28, so as to normalize the tension situation in energy markets, critical raw materials, fertilizers, and other products essential to our economy.
On this point, we are already working with the coalition for the Strait of Hormuz promoted by the United Kingdom, which includes over 30 countries, to try to build security conditions that allow the full restoration of freedom of navigation and supply. A contribution that we believe is important in this negotiation phase.
This positive glimmer of resolution of the crisis with Iran, however, does not negate a more comprehensive reflection that we have the duty to address.
TRUMPISM AS A CONTINUATION OF OBAMISM AND BIDENISM
Because it is undeniable that we are living through a particularly difficult moment in relations between Europe and the United States, but it is equally undeniable that the current American administration has accelerated a path that was widely anticipated by previous administrations, both Republican and Democratic: progressively diverting attention from Europe to focus on global competition with China, thus choosing the Indo-Pacific as the priority geostrategic quadrant.
A clear trajectory that recent European leaderships have long, and in my opinion culpably, preferred not to grasp. Including those that governed Italy and were content with a pat on the back or a tweet of endorsement when forming a new government.
History, in short, is knocking, and Europe is called not to fail this test. And to do so, it must be able to adapt its strategy to a world changing at the speed of light, putting the principle of reality before bureaucratic superstructures and ideological dogmas.
ITALY’S ACTION IN BRUSSELS
It is in this light that our relentless commitment in Brussels must be seen: supporting competitiveness, bureaucratic simplification, a green transition that is realistic and not ideological, balanced strategic autonomy that gradually reduces our dependencies. And for a defense capability that does not make us dependent on our American allies, as evidently proposed by those who attack greater investments in security. To make Europe stronger, more effective, faster, more pragmatic, more focused on citizens’ problems and the real challenges the world around us poses.
This is our share of responsibility. That is, before expecting something from others, we try to really take care of ourselves.
Then, there are the United States, the other side of the coin. Because what we call the West rests on two legs: the European leg and the North American leg. If the two legs do not move in the same direction, the West is destined for paralysis. And, ultimately, irrelevance.
I continue to believe in the need to work to guarantee the unity of the West, a topic I have strongly supported since a very different administration sat in the White House. I would be tempted to say, borrowing a phrase dear to Hon. Schlein, that we are “stubbornly united.” And if she can afford to be so with respect to the colorful political forces that make up the broad field, I can well afford it with respect to Europe and the United States, which have been together for a very, very long time. We are “stubbornly Western” because only if the West is united can it be a force capable of having a say on the world stage. And because without that unity, we, not others, would be weaker.
THE PRIORITY OF STRENGTHENING NATO
But, of course, to stay together, both must want it. And that is why, in the relationship with the United States, we must be clear. Work to keep the two sides of the Atlantic together; work to strengthen NATO, which represents on the one hand the political place where the interests of America and Europe find their composition, and on the other an indispensable geostrategic and military tool, in which Europe must take on its responsibilities and courageously build the European pillar of the Alliance to guarantee its own security first.
WHEN MELONI DID NOT FOLLOW TRUMP
But on the other hand, as is normal among allies, one must also say clearly when there is disagreement. As we did in the past with tariffs, which we often defined as a wrong choice that we did not share. As we did to defend the honor of our soldiers in Afghanistan, who were unacceptably called “useless.” As we did on Greenland, participating in every European document defending the integrity of its territory and the sovereignty of its people, and on Ukraine in the face of negotiation proposals we did not consider sustainable.
WE DO NOT AGREE WITH TRUMP ON THE WAR IN IRAN
And finally, as we did with the war in Iran, a military operation that Italy did not share and did not participate in. A fact that emerged fully with the Sigonella incident, in which Italy scrupulously adhered to the letter of the treaties and agreements regulating our relations with the United States. A circumstance that dispels the usual cheap propaganda heard even in recent weeks.
CRITICISMS OF ISRAEL
And speaking of speaking clearly to partners, that is also what we did with Israel regarding Lebanon: we supported the Lebanese government, its territorial sovereignty, its commitment to disarm the terrorist militias of Hezbollah, and for this we repeatedly asked Israel to stop the military escalation, guarantee the safety of the UNIFIL mission personnel to which Italy has provided its irreplaceable contribution for decades, allow the return of an already exorbitant number of displaced persons, also to avoid the risk of renewed migratory flows towards Europe. With the same frankness, we defended the right of Christian communities in the Holy Land to celebrate Easter rites with full access to the Holy Sepulchre, a sacred place of our civilization and a pillar of our identity. With even greater firmness, we spoke out against the unacceptable events that occurred yesterday against our UNIFIL personnel, to whom we renew our solidarity and that of the entire nation.
Frankness with partners when we do not share their actions, and closeness and support to partners under attack. As you know, a few days ago I was the first among EU and G7 leaders to visit Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, countries that since last February 28 have been subjected to unjustified aggression by Iran.
I wanted to express to them Italy’s solidarity and closeness, but I also worked to ensure energy supplies, particularly oil, essential from an area that guarantees about 15% of our national demand.
MY MISSIONS
With the same spirit, I also went to Algeria to strengthen the strategic partnership that binds our nations with President Tebboune and to agree with the authorities in Algiers on increasing natural gas supplies to Italy. And I will do the same soon in Azerbaijan, as well as supporting the development of energy resources together with partners from the African continent.
Yet, even on this, the opposition managed to polemicize, calling the mission a “show” or even a “flight” from alleged government and majority problems. I do not want to stoop to this level of controversy, especially if made by parliamentarians who write outraged posts on social media while on vacation
