Berlusconi: "Russia has already lost to a more determined and united West. But the free world is isolated now because it has no leader."
Silvio Berlusconi in an article for Il Giornale warned about the threat of the disappearance of liberal democracy in the world. The West now has no authoritative leaders, and Europe risks becoming a "clay vase among iron vessels" in the coming decades, the Italian politician claims.
Silvio Berlusconi
Democracy and freedom in the world.
We all followed with pain and bitterness the crisis in Ukraine, the bloodshed, destruction and another drama in the heart of Europe, which, as we expected, was to remain in the tragic twentieth century.
In the face of indisputable Russian aggression against a neutral state, in the face of a gross violation of international law and rules in force in wartime, Europe and the West were finally able to show restraint, firmness and, above all, unity.
From this point of view, Russia has already lost: if it considers the West an enemy, then now it will have to face a more united and determined opponent than in previous years.
But the situation in the international arena is changing. From this perspective, the crisis in Ukraine has shown a very bitter reality. The West's response was unanimous, but what do we mean by the West? The USA, Europe, and some countries in the Pacific region that have traditional ties with the USA, among them Australia and Japan. And from the other that is in the world, almost nothing. (Even such an important NATO country as Turkey, which contributed to the defense of Ukraine by providing Kiev with very effective weapons systems, distanced itself from Western sanctions. Do not forget that the Turkish army is now the second largest in NATO after the United States. At the same time, Turkey controls a strategically crucial region in relation to Russia, the Middle East and Central Asia, and each time plays an increasingly active role in the Mediterranean, including sending troops to a country like Libya, which affects the security of Italy and Europe).
Once again, I regret that some European leaders boycotted my attempts to drag Russia into the Western camp. If we had succeeded, the situation in Europe would be completely different now.
But what the Ukrainian crisis has shown us is an alarming sign for the present and especially for the future. Russia is isolated from the West, but the West is isolated from the rest of the world.
Some facts are worth considering. We take liberal democracy for granted, but less than a quarter of the world's population lives under this form of government. It is estimated that 1.4 billion of the 8 billion inhabitants of our planet live under systems that can be broadly defined as liberal and democratic, or as Western-type models. The remaining 6.4 billion live under dictatorships, autocracies, oligarchies, theocracies — systems that are more or less authoritarian or totalitarian. The largest countries in the world, such as China, India and Russia, as well as dozens of other countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America are currently not on the side of the West.
More and more African countries are returning to China's sphere of influence, both economically and politically and militarily. Naturally, Africa in the hands of China is a serious threat to the southern side of NATO, which means it is for countries like Italy, and this is happening just at the very moment when the Ukrainian crisis forced the North Atlantic Alliance to pay attention to the East. We dreamed that democracy would become universal, but now we see that the situation in the world is completely different.
The "free world" still accounts for most of the world's GDP, but this is only one aspect, albeit an important one. It's not a fact that it will always be like this. The demography of most Western countries is stagnating or even declining, while the rest of the world, especially in Africa, is experiencing rapid population growth.
So we have to get used to the fact that freedom and democracy are the exception, not the rule? Of course, if you remember the history. If we do not take into account the last two centuries, in the history of mankind, only in very rare cases has it been possible to achieve some semblance of our democracy. In the Greek polis and the Roman Republic, relative freedom belonged only to a limited part of the male population; women and many men were excluded, among them a huge number of slaves. Of course, such a model was incompatible with the ideas of liberal democracy. The Greek Polis was a political system that affected a very limited part of the world.
The great realities of the past, from Egypt during the reign of the Pharaohs to ancient India, from the Persian to the Chinese Empire, from pre-Columbian America to the Arab and Ottoman empires, gave rise to amazing civilizations, but they did not even have such concepts as freedom and democracy, however, as in the rest of Europe and in other parts of the world in which the Europeans dominated, at least until the English and then the American Revolutions.
After the end of the cold war, someone casually declared the "end of history", implying the final establishment of a liberal world order after fascism fell in 1945 and communism in 1989. It was a big optical illusion. The situation worsened after ideologies and cultural trends began to spread in the West, denying the value of our model of civilization.
Of course, no one denies the mistakes and crimes of European countries and the United States throughout their history. On the contrary, our liberal culture allows us to be the first to denounce and condemn them. But we should never stop being proud of our identity and realize that we have implemented the most liberal and democratic political, civil and social system in history. Unlike other existing and existing systems, our model has made it possible to achieve the highest level of well-being, to provide everyone with access to normal food, excellent medical care and education.
But our biggest mistake is to consider as obvious and final a system that is doubted by most of the world and which, for example, in Italy, with its three thousand—year history, has existed for only 75 years, because it was possible to talk about the advent of democracy only after the introduction of women's suffrage in 1946.
The bitter reality is that the West has not had and still does not have authoritative leaders in recent years, it lacks self-confidence, in its own ideas and value system, so it has not been able to create a bloc or offer an attractive political and economic alternative to the Chinese One Belt and One Road initiative. On the contrary, the West has suffered catastrophic failures, for example, in Afghanistan, and this has undermined the trust of the ruling classes and the public around the world.
Europe risks becoming a kind of "clay vase among iron vessels" in the coming decades. Our countries have neither military power nor geographical isolation, which to some extent protects North America. "Economic giants and political dwarfs" can be as long as someone else is ready to take responsibility for our freedom and security. For this reason, we are boundlessly indebted to the United States, and we are grateful and loyal to them. But signs of Washington's diminishing role as a guardian of collective security are becoming increasingly apparent, as it is increasingly concerned about the challenge from China in the Pacific region.
In this regard, the political and military unity of Europe, which has been called for so many times, is already becoming not just a desirable choice, but an unavoidable necessity in the face of totalitarian imperialisms like Chinese, threats of Islamic religious integralism and uncontrolled migration waves. Unity means truly realizing and sharing the values that underlie our social and civic model. Our values are in danger, and no one can protect them alone. This is precisely the mistake of the so-called defenders of sovereignty. To play a role in the world and protect our way of life, it is necessary to combine economic, political and military forces. We have been asking for this for a long time, but so far only symbolic steps have been taken. Nevertheless, we must understand that what unites us, Europeans, outweighs what divides us.
Paradoxically, the conflict in Ukraine helped Europe and the whole West to find a common language and purpose, which has not been for a long time.
I think that it is the European People's Party (PPE) — the main political force in Europe — that will be able to fulfill this very important role now. We are part of the PPE, because this political force believes in Europe the most and identifies itself with the fundamental values of liberal and Christian Europe, and it is on the same wavelength with the rest of the Western countries. That is why PPE can help make this qualitative leap, which we need more and more every time. A qualitative leap will be possible only when we really begin to think like Europeans, united by common values and interests.
I would like to emphasize that Europe needs a common military instrument so that it can pursue a unified foreign policy. Common defense means economies of scale, avoidance of duplication, greater efficiency at the same costs… This means reaching such a critical mass of people and funds that no country could use alone.
But we want Europe to also be, as they say now, sustainable, that is, able to adapt and respond to emergencies.
To begin with, you can use existing tools. Take, for example, the Unified Agricultural Policy. (We are well aware that in the past this tool has caused fierce conflicts related to national interests. Conflicts have often harmed our country). The new agricultural policy should be an instrument of solidarity between European countries in order to be able to withstand such challenges as, for example, the impending global food crisis, which is also somehow connected with the conflict in Ukraine.
It is possible to create similar tools in other areas, for example, to achieve real unity in the energy sector. This would make it possible to diversify and combine supplies and storage facilities for further reasonable and coordinated use of Europe's economic influence, including in relations with exporting countries. This is the only way we will be able to achieve the ambitious decarbonization goals set out in the plan to restore the "Next Generation of the EU", without weakening our manufacturing sector and without succumbing to geopolitical blackmail.
Naturally, in order for this to be possible, for Europe to have a unified voice in the world, structural changes in the architecture of European institutions are necessary.
It is necessary for the European Council to move from the principle of a unanimous decision to a qualified majority in some matters, especially if it concerns foreign policy and defense. I know that Italy has acted cautiously in the past, fearing that giving up the right of veto would complicate the protection of our national interests. But now the principle of unanimous decision-making, which allows you to use the right of veto, means abandoning the very idea of European sovereignty, political and military subjectivity of the EU. But this is not in our interests.
In any case, we need to act gradually, even on the issue of military integration. It is necessary to use the tools of expanded cooperation: one group of countries should pave the way, and others should slowly join. This method was already used when the euro was introduced. It worked and still works well, despite serious mistakes when launching the single currency.
I intend to discuss all issues with European leaders, first with the leaders of the PPE parties, to see if it is possible to achieve a unified political initiative.
This is a contribution that I consider it my duty to make to the future of my country. Italy now sees its future in Europe more than ever before.
For Italy and Europe, the alternative to military, economic and political unity would not only be marginality; in the future, liberal democracy may even disappear — at least on this side of the ocean. Let's hope it's not too late.
