In the vortex that seems to overwhelm a structure that has lasted since
the end of the Second World War, many are wondering what Italy's rolewill be in redefining global geopolitics. Trump's return to the White
House seems to have determined an acceleration of processes already
underway that would mark the end of globalization and the advent of an
era in which nationalism, protectionism and clashes (political,
commercial, military) between blocs will prevail. ---- The most
accredited and popular analysts believe that a path has already begun
that will lead the United States to a disengagement, especially
military, from the European theater to concentrate its resources in
countering the Chinese advance, in rebalancing its trade balance, which
in December 2024 marked a record deficit of 98.4 billion dollars, in
restarting its manufacturing industry through the imposition of duties
and the fight against immigration. All this regardless of Trump who, far
from being the cause of such an upheaval, can be its most consequential
and determined interpreter.
If this is the picture, what role can Italy carve out for itself? On the
economic level, the introduction of the duties threatened by Trump could
certainly have a negative impact on an economy, like the Italian one,
which in recent decades has built its modest economic growth precisely
on exports. But within a crisis that is affecting all of Europe,
starting with Germany, which has been the driving force so far, the room
for maneuver is reduced and governments are showing all their
incapacity. Thus, doubts are beginning to be raised from many quarters
on the economic policy choices made up to now that have hinged on wage
austerity, reduction of public spending, export incentives. Now, the
shock triggered by Trump's America has exposed the fragility of such a
development model and thrown the European ruling classes into disarray.
So some have gone so far as to suggest that we need to change course and
focus on internal development based on the growth of wages and national
consumption. After years of austerity and wage containment, the only
tool of competitiveness practiced, we are suddenly waking up as
Keynesians. But as Emiliano Brancaccio warns, in an article published in
Il Manifesto on 19 February commenting on Mario Draghi's speech at the
European Parliament, this is a Keynesianism steeped in liberalism and
tinged with imperialism. In fact, the recipe put forward by the former
banker would include a further and radical liberalization of the
European internal market with the aim of strengthening the capitalist
groups capable of competing with the American and Chinese giants. "But -
writes Brancaccio - the competition between giants, today more than
ever, is based not only on price wars but also on the military control
of transit, on the violent conquest of new trade lines, on the brutal
hoarding of other people's resources. Hence the need to give European
foreign policy a supply of weapons and troops worthy of an imperial
profile."
And here we are at the most debated issue: armaments and war at the base
of the new world order in which the various imperialisms clash to impose
their hegemony, without the pretense of an apparent democracy and
regulated international relations: selfish defense of their own national
interests (and of the caste in power), throwing away the mask of
collaboration and exchange. Trump, as has been said, is the most candid
and unveiled interpreter, the pure apologia of force.
Since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, in February three years ago,
the push for rearmament has become increasingly pressing: from 2% of GDP
in military spending requested by NATO leaders, we have arrived at
Trump's joke of pushing it up to 5%. It seems to have become a
commonplace even in our political debate, with very rare exceptions, the
idea that only by arming oneself can one survive in the face of the
disruption of world politics. Government ministers and parliamentarians
repeat it, much of the institutional opposition thinks so, the media and
information trumpet it. In an article that appeared in Limes in last
December's issue, this belief is expressed with extreme clarity. For
some time now, this magazine has been engaged in a real campaign to
propagandize the role of small hegemony that Italy should play in some
areas (Mediterranean and sub-Saharan Africa) in substitution and in
agreement with the United States. The article, by Germano Dottori,
significantly bears the title Italy must become adult. Here are some
excerpts: "Of course, in such a scenario we will run greater risks, but
it would be shortsighted to ignore all the opportunities that a growth
in geopolitical role and stature could create to our advantage. In any
case, we are about to be faced with choices that can no longer be
postponed, also because it would be completely illusory to imagine
Trump's second term in the White House as an accident.[..]The increase
in military spending that will be imposed on us to continue to enjoy the
American military guarantee will have to be invested in the acquisition
of what is needed to protect ourselves in those regions. We will
therefore derive significant benefits from this, in addition to the
benevolence of the United States, because the exercise of a higher
profile role will also result in an increase in our direct influence on
some countries of interest to us. In any case, it will not be a
non-existent European sovereign who will take over from America where it
chooses to no longer be present or to be there at a lower level, but
individual nation states, including ours. This is a circumstance that
worries many, also because it makes us responsible and perhaps will
require the selection of a ruling class with different characteristics
than those currently prevalent. But this change that is looming on the
horizon should be welcomed and push us to relaunch that debate on the
best way to pursue our national interests".
All very clear. Of course it is a bleak and alarming picture in which
the only reality that is presented to us, as if it were inevitable, is
the capitalist and imperialist one. If this is the political project
accepted and desired by the national establishment, and it matters
little that today there is a fascist government and tomorrow perhaps a
progressive one, instead there is great confusion among those who should
oppose such a program, among those who would think of opposing the war
and, on the contrary, would like to promote a sincere internationalism.
An example of this disorientation is an article that appeared on the
website of the magazine Jacobin Italia written by Salvatore Cannavò. The
title is C'è lo confronto interimperialiste e non ho niente da putmi and
within it there is a detailed analysis, in some ways shareable, which
then however gets bogged down in the narration of how there is a clash
between imperialisms in which Europe risks being crushed if it does not
manage to react as a single State to "become an imperial power[...]be
the most active subject in the construction of a multipolar and
multilateral order, weave relationships with the rest of the world,
fight to restore meaning and vitality to the United Nations". Assuming
that this is practicable, which Cannavò himself does not believe, are we
really sure that this is what the subaltern classes should hope for or
rather a total upheaval of capitalist and imperialist logic, even the
European one? Perhaps the time has come to reject this unilateral vision
of reality and, taking up an overused and weakened slogan from some time
ago, finally work for another possible world.
Angelo Barberi
https://www.sicilialibertaria.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten