Pietro De Leo March 25, 2022
There is a church. And there is part of the political world. It is the front that expresses its opposition these days to the NATOinitiated increase in military spending, which was undertaken, inter alia, by by our government. Yesterday, Pope Francis returned to the topic: “I was ashamed when I read that a group of countries had committed to spending 2 percent of the money. GDP to buy weapons in response to what is happening, crazy! ” She said during an audition at the Italian Women’s Center. And again: “The real answer is not a different weapon, different sanctions, other politicalmilitary alliances,” said the Pope, “but a different approach, a different way of governing the world, not showing teeth, a way that is now globalized and establishing international relations.” The position is also shared by the CEI, which Secretary General Monsignor Stefano Russo called for “total disarmament”. Apart from the destructive message, everything is easy to read in two respects. On the one hand, Francis throughout his pontificate repeatedly thundered against the production and trade of arms. On the other hand, there is a case where the Pope puts himself in third position (he also condemned the Russian invasion) and thus potentially mediation.
It is different in politics, where the departure from the 2% initiative defines leadership and highlights the contours of the debate within the coalition and within the parties themselves. In this connection, attention is drawn to the embarrassment of Matteo Salvini, who is connected precisely with the Pope: “The path marked out noted Izoradio leads through the Holy Father. I don’t think guns hold back any other weapon . And he emphasized “harmony” with the Pope “in the matter of the necessity of reasoning, resolving the situation with an answer that is not armed, but justified.” The theme of the weapon, however, is to create real combat within the framework of the Five Star Movement. Yesterday, Giuseppe Conte was very firm on this point: if there is a new vote in the Senate on an increase in military spending, “the Movement could only vote against.” The words in a press interview in which a reporter noted that this way the government would collapse replied: “everyone will make his own choice.” The “no” was also repeated in relation to the ANPI video: “Italy would not be a country fulfilling its constitutional charter if, instead of diligently investing in helping families and businesses, it did so to increase its own military spending.” The position in clear contradiction to what happened in the Chamber, where the agenda of the Ukrainian decree to increase military expenditure by up to 2% was also approved by a vote of pentastelations. And that, in addition to indicating the dimension of alliances (the Democratic Party took a position clearly in line with Draghi’s line), the dimension of government is also expanding (where the arms dossier has sparked new tension with Draghi). gap with the Foreign Minister Luigi Di Maio. It is no coincidence that Conte’s decisive departures come on the day when the head of Farnesina is with the prime minister in Brussels at the NATO summit.
And certainly not anesthetic is the comment by Alessandro Di Battista, who left the Movement questioning his membership of the National Unity Board: “To Conte said the former deputy Adnkronos I say, go further: in these battles, if you do it to the end, always you will have my support ». Meanwhile, the soap opera by Vito Petrocelli, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, was lengthening and he announced that he would no longer vote for the confidence vote for the government. Despite repeated requests to resign from his function, he maintains his position and at present there is not even a mass resignation of the remaining members of the body. So much so that yesterday calls were made by Riccardo Villari, who also in 2008 was at the center of fierce resistance to the chairman of the Vigil’s parliamentary committee, where he was elected despite various indications from the opposition. of At that time. “I wouldn’t take the same step again,” Agi admitted, “Petrocelli should step down from the Foreign Affairs Committee, but that must be his choice.” Which he apparently doesn’t want to achieve yet.
