The racism emergency

In less than one month, the following episodes happened in Italy:
- a 19-year-old Italian of Burkinian origin (he had lived in Italy since he was three) was clubbed to death in Milan by two shopkeepers, for allegedly stealing a packet of biscuits. While they were chasing and beating him, the killers repeatedly shouted negro di merda, “shitty nigger”
- a 22-year-old Ghanese was insulted and beaten by local police agents in Parma, who mistakenly exchanged him for a drug dealer out of the school where he attended evening courses. They also wrote “nigger” after his name on the envelope that notified his arrest.
- a 36-year-old Chinese man was assaulted and beaten by a group of five Italian teenagers in Rome, while he was waiting for a bus. The boys insulted him calling “cinese di merda”.

You would expect the government and local authorities to condemn these acts convincingly. They did (sort of), but always adding that those weren't hate crimes. The Berlusconi government, today with Internal Affairs minister Roberto Maroni, played down the “racism emergency”, as it's called by the media and the opposition. Hardly surprising, as the parties in goverment have played the “security” - aka “fear of immigrants” - card in the elections, and they are still portraying Italy as a country invaded by foreigners.
You don't have to be a one-world leftist to see a cause-effect relationship here. Can anybody in their right mind honestly believe that a white guy would have been clubbed to death, had he stolen some biscuits? Security has been the top issue in the media for the last eight months. Centre-right politicians – from the overtly xenophobic Northern League to the Neo-Fascists - are more popular than ever for their tough anti-immigration stance. When you feed the people with all this invasion/immigration claptrap, you foment their worst instincts. And when you deny that racism plays a role here, you condone these violent acts.
“Italians are not racist, they are brava gente, good people” is a too-often-heard sentence that has no meaning anymore. Maybe it used to be so, when immigrants were seldom to be found in a country with almost no colonial past. But in the last twenty years, Italy has seen its immigrant population soar. And in a country in economic and cultural decline, strangers are enemies. It'd take responsible political leadership to put together a national response, a “new Italian identity” for the 21st Century. But that's nowhere to be seen, at the moment.

Will be back very soon

I'm sorry for not updating the blog in the last month. I've been travelling for work and I'm busy settling some stuff in Italy right now. I promise to write again very soon. With Italy gearing back to normalcy after the summer holidays, after all I'm ever more desperate.

Hardtalk journalism. But never in Italy

I watched with gusto yesterday's BBC Hardtalk, an interview with Franco Frattini. Italian politicians able to talk publicly in English are rare to be found. And Italy's Foreign Minister, despite some grammar mistakes and often-repeated sentences (such as "frankly speaking", "oh yesss", and a Roman accent quite evident when he went out of his script), talked his way through Stephen Sackur's usual grilling, managing (hardly) to keep his cool.

As I always do when I watch Hardtalk, I instinctively pick a winner, and this time it was the journalist, big time. Frattini's answers sounded shallow especially on immigration and Roma discrimination, too official, sometimes out of the context; and in some moments you would expect the minister to take off his smiling mask and start ranting at Sackur. But he didn't.

Anyway, while I was watching Hardtalk, I couldn't help but think that you don't see interviews like this in Italy. Political journalism here doesn't go further than putting a microphone under the politician's chin, while he looks at the camera and talks to the viewer (you can't blame them, actually: the journalist is useless, and his questions could be written by the politician's press office). Reporters who dare ask uncomfortable questions are treated by politicians like partisan, unprofessional journalists with a political agenda.

Two years ago, when he was the opposition leader, Silvio Berlusconi walked out of Lucia Annunziata's "Mezz'ora", a one-to-one interview clearly inspired by Hardtalk. Annunziata's questions were soft, by Sackur's standards, but that was more than enough for Berlusconi, who accused her of being biased. The saddest thing about that episode was the reaction of the people. While you could expect fellow politicians would defend Berlusconi, many Italians - even progressive-leaning ones - admitted they were uneasy with Annunziata's aggressive style. And the fact that Annunziata is actually more centre-left than centre-right (although radical leftists consider her too pro-American and conservative), in the eyes of many, prevented her from being "fair" to her guest. Therefore, whatever perfectly legitimate question she posed to Berlusconi, it was because she was biased. Following this way of thinking, it is the journalist who has to prove his guest he's fit to the role, not the other way round.

That's why they should broadcast yesterday's Hardtalk on Italian tv, with subtitles. Because you will never see Frattini grilled for half an hour by an Italian journalist. He simply wouldn't accept the invitation. And if he did, he would know he can call the journalist biased, when he's facing tough questions. Try do that with Stephen Sackur.

Mamma mia!, the army in the streets

The government is already hailing it a success. Italians unlucky enough to spend August in the big cities, however, don't know whether to laugh or cry: 3,000 troops have been deployed in Milan, Rome and Naples' streets since last Monday, in order to crack down on petty crimes.
One could wonder what crimes you'd expect in ghost towns as those three cities are during the summer holidays, unless you plan to put a soldier in every block to defend empty flats from burglars. And whether Italy has seen a statistical rise in crime is open to debate: data are open to interpretation, the government and the opposition produce the ones that suit their theories best.
Anyway, the initiative is clearly part of the recent Italian obsession with "security", which usually goes with immigration-bashing. Some months before last April's election, the media agenda has been dominated by news related to immigrants - arriving in mass from Africa, getting stranded at sea, dying on our beaches, joyriding and killing innocents, raping. Every piece of news, every reported crime, kicks up a media frenzy if committed by foreigners. Berlusconi's goverment is playing into the people's fear that immigrants are taking Italy over: last week it even declared a state of emergency.
Being a nation with only a recent history of immigration, Italy could be forgiven for its inexperience to deal with the problem. But the government's populism and eagerness to subtly exploit the immigration card is, I would say, criminal itself. Instead of crafting policies to manage the problem, it sheds responsibility by declaring it insolvable, implying the use of force is the only way. The results: a hysteric country, scared citizens ready to take security into their hands because they don't trust the state, and ultimately a nation that feels besieged. And that, rather than opening itself to the world in the era of globalization, chooses to retract in its own carapace. And therefore, to decline.

Who cares about Alitalia

Three months after the elections, when Berlusconi aroused the traded unions into rejecting Air France's plan and promised a quick solution, the Alitalia saga still looks neverending. The ailing state-controlled air company, after long and overdue negotiations, was about to be sold to the French. Staff cuts were necessary, as Alitalia was (is) virtually bankrupt, and the deal looked reasonable to most observers.
Then Berlusconi, eager to win a third stint in goverment and eyeing a potential electoral coup-de-theatre, upset the table. He knew personally a group of businessmen willing to save Alitalia, and that would be a priority for his government. Alitalia's trade unionists, widely despised by Italians for being out of touch with reality and defending absurd privileges, upped the ante. And AirFrance left the table.

A hundred days later, Alitalia is barely surviving only thanks to a 300 million state loan, highly frowned upon by the EU. The company has cut flights but also lost passengers, and is losing over 1 million euros a day, more than it used to lose daily when a deal with AirFrance was still possible. Berlusconi is still promising to save the "italianity" of the company, but is now warning that some staff cuts will be necessary. Thanks for informing us: it would be bizarre if the new "saviours" cut more staff than AirFrance intended to do. Meanwhile, counting only the last three months, Alitalia cost every Italian more than 5 euros. God knows how much more during the years. And I don't know a single person who actually cares about the "italianity" of Alitalia. Cheaper flights and a better service would be more important.

You said renewable energy? Italy goes nuclear

There's much talk about a return to nuclear energy in Italy. After shutting down its (few) atomic plants in 1987, as Italians approved a referendum still in the wake of the Chernobyl accident, the government now wants to go nuclear again.

Now, I'm not biased against nuclear. There are pros and cons: it provides cleans energy, security has improved - but plants are expensive, they require huge investments, and the problem of waste-disposal is unsolved. But the point is: while the rest of the world is investing in new forms of energy - wind, solar, biomass, biofuels, geothermal - Italy is pursuing an old idea.

Other countries are betting heavily on nuclear energy: the UK is planning 8 new plants, and in the US John McCain has envisaged 45 new plants if elected. But in those countries, heavy investimens on new energy are already in place. And the cost of energy produced by solar, wind, biomass, thanks to (non-existent in Italy) R&D, is going steadily down. While the cost of uranium - a finite resource - has risen 19-fold since 2000. The future, it is widely assumed, belongs to renewable energy.

With its southern regions enjoying sunny days for most of the year, Italy has "one of the largest potentials for solar energy in Europe", reckons the US Energy Information Administration, which adds that "analysts estimate that Italy could have the largest, per-capita geothermal potential in the world". Why don't politicians talk about this, instead of squabbling on TV about secondary issues?

With no oil and gas on its territory, the country pays the highest electricity bills in Europe. Higher than Germany, which has put a renewable-energy tax on electricity bills since the early '90s, and now is one of the top producers of wind and solar energy in the world. And 40 percent higher than France, which thanks to its nearly 40 nuclear plants has an excess capacity, allowing the country to export electricy to - yes - Italy.

Of Mafia, Camorra and the real security emergency

Mafia, Camorra and all the other Italian criminal organisations have always sold well in Italy. In the '80s, a TV fiction like La Piovra was one of the biggest hit ever in the country. In the last years, Roberto Saviano's book (and later film) Gomorra has constantly been a best-seller. And when, between May and July 1992, Mafia killed the two most prominent anti-Mafia judges Falcone and Borsellino, Italians were shocked and united in their grief. Yet, never has an Italian government pledged to root the "grande criminalità" out.
Through drug trafficking, extorsions, prostitution, Mafia eats up 7 percent of Italy's GDP, dragging down the whole economy, particularly in the South. Despite some high-profile arrests in the last years, it's as active as ever. And it kills, not just rival criminals, but also innocent and honest people like Raffaele Granata, a beach-owner murdered yesterday near Naples for refusing to pay protection money, the so-called "pizzo".
Sicilians, it has been recently reported, are waking up against Mafia. The number of people reporting extortions to the police is rising. Citizens' associations have been founded. And what is the goverment doing? Nothing. The much-talked about "security emergency" focuses on Roma and immigrants.
Berlusconi's is surely to blame for never mentioning Mafia as a priority, and many analysts have linked the extraordinary success of the centre-right coalition in the South (in the 2001 elections, it scooped up all the 61 contested seats in Sicily) to the "soft approach" towards Mafia, a decisive vote-gatherer in some Southern regions. But the centre-left coalition, despite some commendable candidates (like Borsellino's sister Rita) has hardly played the Mafia card in any elections.
Maybe politicians think that Mafia is too big a cancer to eradicate, therefore it can just be contained. Maybe the Mafia backing is too important to win in some constituencies. Maybe investing heavily in the struggle against the high criminality would not improve noticeable results. Maybe it just requires too much courage to stand up to Mafia, because vengeance is likely. But I guess that, if a national coalition put the struggle against Mafia, Camorra, 'Ndrangheta and the likes at the top of its priorities, stressing the message that Italy can be different, that the state can really protect those who dare stand up, Italians would pull together and things could change.
Think of a new prime minister announcing on TV, or in his first speech to the country or to a crowd of supporters, "We shall overcome against Mafia", or "yes, we can". Unthinkable? Maybe. Surely unseen in Italy, up to now.

Italy's opposition, a laughing stock for all

Foreign observers used to laugh at Italian politics because governments changed once a year. Now they make fun of us because of Berlusconi. But the behaviour of the current centre-left coalition deserves the same treatment.
While the government majority has basicly coalesced into two parties (Berlusconi's People of Freedom and the xenophobic and populist Northern League), the opposition is more divided than ever, even after being drubbed in last April's elections.
Following all the splits and name-changing facelifts is hard even by Italian standards. After splitting into three Communist parties, the far left united under one flag but got kicked out from the Parliament. The Democratic Party, the biggest movement in the coalition, was born from the merger between the secular Leftist Democrats and left-catholic The Daisy and was led by Walter Veltroni, a popular former mayor of Rome who took inspiration from Kennedy and Obama, but suffered a hard blow in April, despite the alliance with a small but fiery anti-corruption party led by former Tangentopoli prosecutor Antonio Di Pietro.
After the usual grand electoral promises, Berlusconi swiftly changed his priorities to what he does best: fixing the trials he's involved in with some self-tailored laws. In today's case, by passing a law that would temporarily freeze trials for the four highest political figures.
And how does the opposition reply? The radical left is busy trying to find a new identity, and is nowhere to be seen. Veltroni's Democrats, unconspicuous in their opposition but active with a "shadow government" so shadowy that few Italians realize it exists, apparently are convinced that the best way to tackle Berlusconi is by means of "dialogue for the reforms", a vague mantra that Italian politicians have kept repeating for the last ten years, to the point that nobody knows what these reforms would be anyway.
Di Pietro's Italy of Values, together with citizens who feel unrepresented by any parties but follow Beppe Grillo, a stand-up comedian-cum-firebrand, is the only one actively trying to denounce the prime minister's attempts to muzzle the judiciary.
This week, tens of thousands of people took to Rome's Piazza Navona to participate in a mass protest organized by Di Pietro. Anti-Berlusconi voters watched with a mix of hope and perplexity, but it was a stirring event anyway, when compared with Veltroni's smooth style.
And what happened today? The Democrats attacked Di Pietro, vehemently asking him to choose "between the streets and the Parliament". Another division in Italy's beleaguered opposition. On the other side, Berlusconi must be watching the show and have a laugh, too.

Hello, Silvio talking. But not resigning

Some of them were made public. Others, the really juicy ones, were later destroyed after a judicial order. But, if secret they were meant to be, word got quickly around that countless wiretaps of Berlusconi phone calls exposed some sexually dubious behaviour by the Italian prime minister.
It didn't take long. In one of the conversations, as left-leaning La Repubblica subtly wrote, Berlusconi "boasts about some of his female ministers' qualities". And in his defence of Berlusconi, conservative Libero's editor Vittorio Feltri said that poor Silvio cannot be blamed if he likes "la gnocca" (pussy).
By word of mouth, now everybody points the finger at the Equal Opportunities minister Mara Carfagna, a 32-year-old former beauty contestant and TV presenter, who recently became the youngest minister ever in Italy. Many Italians, who maligned at the time on the reasons for such a quick ascent to power, now can't refrain from snickering.
In another conversation, published by L'Espresso magazine, Berlusconi - at a time when he was just the opposition leader - pressures a state TV manager to find a role for a little-known starlet who keeps saying the prime minister wants to block her career. One would wonder why. Anyway, that's a plain Italian-style recommendation, and not based on work merits.
A plethora of right-wing journalist, and of course politicians of his coalition, rose up to defend Silvio: his private life is his business, shame on the communist judges and journalists who revel in listening to his conversations. Many Berlusconi voters would probably think the same. After all, everybody makes recommendations in Italy, and most Italians didn't understand what the fuss was about, when the US got stuck into the Clinton-Lewinsky affair. The concept of resigning must be so absurd that nobody even mentions it. If somebody dared to, he would be quickly ridiculed.
Yet, nobody seems to get the ethical point. Shouldn't the prime minister explain to his voters if the "qualities" of one of his female ministers were a factor in giving her the job? Doesn't anybody see anything wrong in a prime minister who, when not even in power, uses his influence to favour somebody's career - in Berlusconi's case with a clear conflict of interests, as he appears to have a say in the decisions of the company that rivals his three TV channels? And don't Berlusconi's female voters have anything to complain about how these episodes confirm the depressing situation of "equal opportunities" in Italy?
In some Northern European countries, it would have taken much less to prompt a politician to resign spontaneously. Last April, Finland's Foreign minister resigned after the media exposed his sending improper text messages to a dancer. In October 2006, Sweden's culture minister resigned after she admitted paying a nanny under the table. But it's not just civil Scandinavians that can look down on Italians. In July 2007, Japan's defence minister resigned after suggesting that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were inevitable. Last January, Malaysia's health minister resigned Wednesday after acknowledging that he and a female friend were the couple in a secretly filmed sex video. And right today, Kenya's finance minister has resigned after being named in a corruption scandal. Had these cases happened in Italy, it wouldn't have been enough to get a resignation. And whoever had been caught in one of these scandals, they would have said it was all a plot against them.