Forza Italia has been, is and will “always be pro-European”. If there were contrary temptations in the government, “we would not be part of it. Because we are loyal, but we will never yield on our principles”. Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani does not raise his voice because it is not his habit, but he is very firm in underlining his party’s position at a time when the divisions in the majority on foreign and European policy are clearly visible.
You vote the same way in Parliament but continue to speak different languages, especially FI and Lega. How can you have a clear stance at world level?
“I have said it and I repeat it: foreign policy is made by the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister, not by the parties. The government, as such, has always deliberated together and the majority has voted united, unlike the opposition which has split with five different motions”.
But if you make foreign policy, why is Salvini going to meet US Vice-President Vance?
“Everyone is free to talk to whomever they want, but this does not mean that there is no government policy line. I repeat that, beyond the statements of some representatives that remain such, the policy line of this government is very clear. It is not slogans that count, but content”.
You and the Prime Minister are therefore in perfect agreement?
“If there were problems I would talk to her about it but, as we said, FI gave her a full mandate to decide in Europe on von der Leyen’s European defence plan. In fact, President Meloni voted in favour of it, supporting a fully pro-European policy line. The one that is ours. If it were not so, we could not rule together. What matters is that we are taking the first steps towards what was Berlusconi’s great dream: a single European defence and EU’s institutional reforms.”
With many distinctions…
“The plan is not something that can be implemented in 30 days: it envisages steps, timescales of months, and of many years to arrive at a hypothetical European army. There are still many aspects to be defined, such as funding. We have clearly stated that we will not use the cohesion funds and the expenses will be deducted from the deficit/GDP ratio, just as we have assured that we will reach 2% of GDP to finance NATO obligations. Other countries have got there, we should get there”.
Salvini, M5S, Avs say that the money that should go to defence could well be used to make Italians better off.
“We should clearly explain what is meant by defence: when our military ships defend the Red Sea and allow the free passage of merchant ships, and thus enable trade and our exports to operate and function smoothly, what are they doing if not the good of Italians? When spending on cybersecurity, i.e. the defence of companies, production, trade and even the State, is this not doing the good of citizens? We would not buy weapons to collect them. Defence is a serious thing, and we have to acknowledge and face reality”.
What would that reality be?
“That the world is changing, that the two pillars on which NATO is based, the European and American ones, should continue to work together with a greater effort from Europe. If we do not prepare to defend ourselves, no one will do it for us in the future. If we had not helped Ukraine, we would have done our European citizens much harm and exposed them to danger. It is easy to say “instead of spending on armoured doors and window grills, let us spend on bandages and medicines”. But if they steal into your house then they will also take the bandages and medicines away. Let us not use simplistic arguments, the matter is very serious”.
Like Europeanism: why did Prime Minister Meloni attack the Ventotene Manifesto?
“Indeed, the Prime Minister did not attack Spinelli, for whom we have all respect. She said that Europe is not her Europe. I consider that Manifesto a contribution to Europe, even if I also say that my reference is the example of De Gasperi, Adenauer, Schuman. But please, let us close this parenthesis and come back to the main point: let us not use Europe’s fathers for a clash that today has no reason to exist, faced with the great challenges with which we are confronted and the decisions we shall take together for Italy and for Europe.”
Let us talk about the tariffs issue: you have been accused by the leader of the PD group in the European Parliament, Zingaretti, of saying things that “border on psychiatry”.
“I was very impressed. I have never attacked a political opponent by saying he/she is “crazy”. I have never insulted anyone. This really sounds like methods from the Stalinist USSR, where you ended up in gulags or in an asylum if you argued against the Party. Everything is contestable, but on the level of content, not on the personal level”.
You argue we should not necessarily boycott US goods or raise tariffs on them in response to Trump’s hostile actions. Is it not a bit weak as a proposal?
“We should not be aggressive, in words, preemptively. The “weapons” that are to be used on this ground must not be such that they explode in our hands. I do not wage war on Trump or Biden; I am pragmatic, I think of our companies’ interests. To impose tariffs, for example, on US whisky would be wrong because it would lead the Americans to impose them on our wine, the exports of which are proportionately much higher. It would be nonsense. We have to be smart and cautious on these matters. We will see how Europe will be able to respond. Trade Commissioner Sefcovic, whom I have met twice in recent days, did well to say that after 2 April we would take two weeks to decide on US tariffs. We sent our own technical mission to Washington. This is the method to be followed, and I am ready to exchange views with everyone, within the majority and the opposition, on these issues, because I know them and I believe I hold balanced views. But I will never come to the level of insults.”
