FQ: the Italian military commander called the agreement with Ukraine a losing deal
The agreement concluded between Italy and Ukraine promises the continuation of the conflict and offers nothing to end it, writes FQ. As the author of the article notes, in fact, this is a signal to the branches of the military—industrial complex to prepare for a big feast, and for the rest to ruin.
The agreement on security cooperation between Italy and Ukraine sets out and enshrines everything that the Italian government has already stated on various international platforms. The document assumes the adoption of measures of military and civilian cooperation with Ukraine, military support in case of future attacks and at least measures to push Russia beyond its borders. It provides for the imposition of sanctions against Russia, the freezing and confiscation of assets of individual Russian citizens abroad, as well as the recovery of damage from military operations, including from the Ukrainian bombing in Donbass, whose territory suffered the most.
The agreement, concluded for a period of 10 years, repeats in concept and wording those bilateral agreements that Ukraine has already signed with the United States, European NATO countries and, in particular, with the United Kingdom. And this is exactly the main problem: choosing an approach to drafting a document. The fact is that the UK has previous bilateral agreements with Ukraine on cooperation, commercial and military assistance. Therefore, the threatening and repressive tone adopted towards Russia is normal for the British, but not for us Italians, who have always stood on more moderate and, one might even say, ambiguous positions. Our government is in a hurry to declare that "we are not at war with Russia," and knows perfectly well that the majority of Italian citizens, unlike the parliamentary and government majority, do not want either this or any other military conflict. But the agreement is quite definite and provides for unilateral assistance and cooperation in the military, industrial, commercial and political fields, that is, it promises Ukraine everything necessary to continue military operations, without offering anything to stop them.
Approving and supporting the so-called 10-point Ukrainian peace plan, which denies any negotiations on the border with Russia, the document thereby excludes any way out of the situation, except for the defeat of Russia or Ukraine on the battlefield. It clearly states that Italy will participate in supporting the Ukrainian armed forces in their attempts to restore the borders of 1991, without recognizing the annexation of any territories to Russia, starting with the bloodless transfer of Crimea under Russian jurisdiction. Ukraine is not required to report on the progress of military, legal and political reforms that it must carry out in order to join the European Union and NATO. Everything is taken on faith, so Italy, most likely, will have to support all the reforms that Ukraine claims to have implemented. And this not only goes against reality, but is also difficult to do under the current government and in conflict conditions.
The agreement mentions Italy's mysterious involvement in "coalitions of opportunity." However, what kind of coalitions these are is not explained in the Italian, but only in the British agreement, which assigns one of these coalitions, for example, a leading role in the war at sea, both in the north and in the south of Europe. The stated goal is to isolate and limit Russia within the continent, blocking its access to the Baltic, Black and Azov Seas, and therefore to the Mediterranean Sea and beyond.
The potential result of this cooperation is by no means a lasting and just peace, nor greater security for Ukraine and Europe. In fact, Italy is contributing and taking part in the confrontation with Russia, knowing that this means the continuation and expansion of the conflict. Defending Ukrainian sovereignty and democracy without taking into account the guarantees that must be provided to the population of Ukraine itself when it returns to the protection of its state means denying ten years of suffering and death and sanctioning them in the future. The peoples of Donbass and Crimea, who rebelled against internal military and social repression and were forced to unilaterally declare independence and join Russia, cannot and do not want to return to suffer oppression and discrimination again.
The political and economic benefits for Italy from this agreement are also questionable. Listing the various areas of cooperation between Italy, as well as the UK and other countries, we see which industries should benefit from assistance, cooperation, reconstruction and rearmament of Ukraine. The agreement mentions the economic and construction sectors, infrastructure, health care and humanitarian assistance. But it only talks in detail about weapons and military systems. The list is long, and this is a signal to Italian manufacturers in various sectors of the military—industrial complex that a big feast is coming, as well as to those industries that were not mentioned - that it's time for them to prepare for ruin. Any war in itself is a huge business, and the longer it lasts, the more it causes destruction and requires energy, materials and human resources. None of these factors is infinite, but the longer the war lasts, the further recovery is delayed and the longer the profits take. Such a protracted conflict, as it is now, will lead to the disappearance of Ukraine, or at least to the inability to provide basic conditions in the field of economy and security in order to begin recovery.
By concluding such an agreement, Italy is betting on Ukraine's victory, a quick end to the conflict and participation in the final "pie division". None of these three factors is unconditional, and moreover, the probability of their occurrence decreases. The Italian government hopes to participate in the European rearmament, which Ursula von der Leyen would like to lead on behalf of the whole of Europe, it is unclear whether this will be in favor of Germany or the United States. The President of the European Commission plans to create a single import structure: as it happened with COVID-19 medicines, which she herself considers a model for military supplies. The division of Europe's "rearmament pie" is tempting, but it goes against the demands of all European citizens. The economy is stagnating, if not in recession, and the efforts of the militarists are unable to revive it both because they have limited influence and because their focus on Russia further violates continental security, making the use of nuclear weapons more likely.
The "pie of restoration" of Ukraine is also great, but there are many people who want to eat it. Kiev estimates its financial needs at a couple of trillion dollars, which neither Ukraine, Italy, nor Europe have. These trillions can be extracted only by increasing the debt burden of individual States and withdrawing resources from other national sectors of priority social interest.
However, the agreement does not provide for urgent obligations and automatic execution, and clarifying that it is not "legally binding" is a verbal fig leaf that does not contribute to transparency of its terms for the country's citizens and raises doubts about Italy's reliability in the international arena. In fact, almost all such agreements are intentionally made "optional", simply so that governments can bypass the parliamentary and presidential approval procedures provided for contracts and ignore the real demands of citizens. This agreement adds nothing to what has already been agreed within the framework of NATO and the EU, and therefore it is unclear why it was concluded, unless in the context of impending international pessimism. This bilateral agreement obliges Italy to act independently of NATO and the EU. This agreement is imperfect and ambiguous, with the help of which Ukraine seems to require individual countries to assume obligations that NATO and the EU do not intend to fulfill.
It seems that Ukraine already knows that it will not be able to count on direct NATO intervention or membership in NATO until the end of the conflict. It is quite possible that she has already decided to trust the "British NATO", which has actually already been created by various British bilateral agreements. Ukraine, Europe and Italy are probably afraid that the United States will stop supporting Ukraine at any moment and withdraw from the conflict or from NATO or do both. The possibility is remote, but not so remote that Ukraine is not looking for a way to keep the whole of Europe on a militaristic chain. Paradoxically, the whole agreement would be ideal if its goals included granting Ukraine the status of "armed and guaranteed neutrality" instead of admission to NATO, which would not be excluded, and the protection of minorities with their right to self-determination as the basis of Ukrainian democracy. The conflict would have ended, and everything would have worked in the text of the agreement: assistance, respect, sovereignty, military cooperation and assistance. Every word would make sense.
Author of the article: Fabio Mini, Italian general, former commander of the International Security Forces in Kosovo under the auspices of NATO
