… analizzato da Andrea Gilli, Alessandro Ungaro ed Alessandro Marrone in un articolo appena pubblicato dal RUSI Journal: "The Italian White Paper for International Security and Defence".
Secondo i ricercatori, il documento pubblicato a maggio dal nostro Ministero della Difesa conterrebbe importanti elementi di novità rispetto al passato. Sia riguardo alla visione strategica che riguardo al processo di elaborazione dello stesso documento. Scrivono gli autori:
[…] Four aspects of the White Paper deserve particular attention. First, in Italy ministries tend to jealously guard their autonomy and responsibilities, which helps to explain the relatively insulated policy-making process. For instance, the process behind the 2002 White Book did not include the involvement of other ministries or consultations with civil society, such as universities or think tanks. The drafting process leading to the 2015 White Paper represented a dramatic departure from this tradition: several institutions and stakeholders, including civil servants from the MoD and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, representatives from the aerospace, security and defence industries, as well as a few civilian experts took part in its formulation. This is a remarkable development that immediately generated important benefits. Primarily, such an inclusive process strengthened the legitimacy of the entire endeavour and elicited a deeper strategic debate within the elites of the country. While it is difficult to say whether such a formula brought explicit consensus, potential opponents have been relatively quiet so far.
Second, the White Paper’s language and concepts represent a cultural departure from dominant traditions in Italian foreign and defence policy. Italian political culture and etiquette generally reward consensus and diplomatic language over leadership and clarity. Relatedly, in the post-Cold War period Italian strategic culture and debate have widely emphasised the role of international organisations and civilian capabilities, often neglecting strategic challenges and national-interest considerations and downplaying, or even opposing, the importance of conventional military capabilities. In contrast, the 2015 White Paper adopts a pragmatic perspective, assigning a central role to national interests, stressing the relationship between means and goals, and ultimately setting clear priorities for the MoD. Similarly, the White Paper unambiguously speaks about the employment of force and deterrence, thus opening the way for a more mature domestic debate about defence and security in the twenty-first century. For instance, partly because of a strict interpretation of Article 11 of the constitution explicitly banning the use of force to address international disputes, military operations generally face significant domestic opposition. In contrast, the White Paper conveys the image of a country that acknowledges not only the possibility and the legitimacy, but also the utility and the opportunity of the use of force in the pursuit of national interests. Given the caution that has traditionally characterised Italian politicians’ language about defence, this change is truly remarkable. The most direct implications of such pragmatism and clarity are evident in the considerations concerning Italy’s geopolitical positioning. Because of the country’s peculiar post-war history (namely, its role during the Second World War, the presence of the largest communist party in Western Europe and its early participation in the European integration process, among others), Italy’s foreign and defence policy has traditionally been characterised by a balanced approach based on an equal commitment to both NATO solidarity and European integration. According to some analysts, as the EU more vigorously stepped into defence issues after the end of the Cold War, this double identity started creating tensions both at home and abroad. According to others, in contrast, the various Italian governments have managed, over the years, to ensure continuity and, specifically, an equal balance between Atlanticism and Europeanism.
Regardless, the third innovation encased in the new document is a distancing from the past with the clear prioritisation of EU ‘integration’ vis-à-vis transatlantic ‘cohesion’. This positions the EU on an equal footing with NATO as a ‘collective political and military tool’. While the geopolitical consequences of this choice are unlikely to be revolutionary, its operational implications are significant: according to the White Paper, Italy will more vigorously pursue co-operation and integration with its European allies in the near future with respect to capabilities development and out-of-area operations, while NATO will continue to function as the primary framework for deterrence and defence of the country and the wider European continent against any threat.
Fourth, since the end of the Cold War, Italy has actively participated in a number of international missions and operations in many areas of the world. This policy has served different goals, including national-interest considerations (such as maintaining stability in proximate countries like Albania), the consolidation of the relationship with the US (through the operations in Kosovo and Iraq), the strengthening of Italy’s role within NATO (through the operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Afghanistan and last but not least, the upholding of the country’s image in the international community. By participating in many peacekeeping and peace-enforcement operations, the Italian government could show the internal cohesion and the international responsibility of a large power. However, over the past decade, Italy’s economic problems, coupled with the effects of the financial crisis, have demanded a substantive reconsideration of this approach, not least because the austerity measures applied to the MoD budget from 2009 have required a greater prioritisation of resources in order to serve Italy’s immediate strategic goals and interests. As a result, the White Paper, on the one hand, recalibrates Italy’s strategic goals and its focus in light of the current budgetary conditions but, on the other, takes the necessary measures to restore the level of resources its goals and interests, demand and its allies expect – in the medium term. […]
Qui di seguito il documento strategico.