Italian House Speaker Fico bets on Biden cure for foreign policy

Joe Biden is readying to replace Donald Trump at the White House, but Trumpism will not go away anytime soon. Roberto Fico, President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, among the leaders of the Five Star Movement, invites to do away with hasty interpretations of the American elections. As he explains in this exclusive interview to Formiche.net, it truly is possible to open a new era in EU-US relations. Still, many shared challenges await them on the diplomatic front, from relations with China and Russia to the dialogue with Iran, from the crisis in Libya to climate change. Here’s how Italy, and the Movement, may ready themselves

President Fico, it looks like the White House has a new occupant: Joe Biden. What do you expect from his administration?

I think that signs of discontinuity will be evident in different areas, starting with his commitment to the environment, a different approach to the migratory phenomenon and the relationship with all minorities, some of which have gone through hard and distressing years. After all, some measures have already been announced by [Mr] Biden, like re-entering in the Paris accords and leaving the Muslim ban behind.

On the international level, it’s generally taken for granted that the US will be returning to a multilateral approach, and that the Transatlantic relationships will recover through renovated forms of collaboration. I think that both guidelines are more than necessary, seeing the enormous global challenges we’re being called to face: the pandemic, climate change, fighting inequalities.

The US is going through a demanding period because of the pandemic and social tensions. Do you think Mr Biden is the right man to unite the country?

The US seem fatigued and divided. In such a contest, [Mr] Biden’s attitude – calm, not yelling – can surely help to lower the temperature and cleanse the political discourse from a certain exasperation and toxicity. There’s a particular need for that in this phase of the pandemic. I think that many of us were baffled when we saw that the use of PPEs had morphed – truthfully, not only in the US – into an element of contrast and a manifestation of political belonging.

At any rate, [Mr] Biden’s restitching work will not be simple because of the historical phase the country is in, the social tensions, the numbers, and the difficult political equilibriums that must be identified. Moreover, he’ll have to deal with the complex balancing of healing the economy and resoluteness in contrasting Covid. These elements were juxtaposed during the electoral campaign.

Is Trumpism waning, inside and outside the American borders?

No, President Trump has been defeated with a majority vote, but the instances of which he became the standard bearer have not disappeared. Instead, we might have entered a new phase, where a certain wave – that became, and is, the expression of [Mr Trump’s] political project – is ebbing. However, it’s all about understanding what concrete responses will be offered by the new administration, because a different narration alone will not suffice.

[Mr] Trump’s support is rooted in a certain territorial fabric, it’s a product of the profound transformations that have impacted the Rust Belt. Evidently, the Democrats have been incapable of addressing them in the past, unable to offer adequate responses, a vision, a political project, and the capacity to renovate.

These are blanks that various progressive forces in Europe, too, have displayed in these years, and they mustn’t be overlooked. Still, [Mr] Biden’s electoral results in those areas of the country signify a moment of recovery for the Democrats with regards to four years ago; they show that a part of that malcontent has been intercepted and understood.

However, many areas across the country are still pervaded by distrust, anger, and an “ancestral” fear that Democratic policies – which are characterised by more multiculturalism and more openness to global trade – will further impoverish the middle and lower income classes.

Outside of the American borders, however, there are certain political actors, some of which lead big countries (I’m thinking of Brazil) that look up to [Mr Trump’s] model. Such parties exist, and they have a following in Europe, too.

Four years ago, Mr Trump’s victory was read as the start of a wave of international change. It begun with Brexit and continued, in Italy, with the birth of the Five Star-League government. As of today, has that wave lost traction?

Firstly, I’d like to distinguish between very different phenomena: Brexit, [Mr] Trump’s victory – i.e. the political ascension of a seasoned entrepreneur, supported by a historic party such as the GOP –, the birth of political movements such as the Five Star Movement, and the birth of the Five Star-League government.

It’s certainly true that in these countries we’ve witnessed different forms of profound dissatisfaction of the national establishments, and their ability to manage the consequences of the [2008 financial] crisis as well as the economic globalisation. We mustn’t underestimate the economic and political reasons that generated this wide, yet heterogeneous, wave of change, which still needs adequate responses.

However, I think that during this crisis something has entered our collective consciousness: the fact that today, in front of the pandemic, we’ve understood that affirming our isolation is a losing strategy, and that cooperation and working together make the world safer. From this point of view, the pandemic may represent a watershed moment as to the general awareness that global phenomena cannot be tackled from our nations’ back yards. That awareness, in turn, deprives the America First doctrine of its oxygen.

Can Mr Biden’s victory impact Italian politics?

Generally, the turnover at the White House always causes internal effects. It will be so in this case, too, especially as [Mr] Biden’s victory may generate a renovated cooperation with the European Union. With regards to an impact on Italian political forces, we’ll observe the consequences, both within individual parties and coalitions. What will happen in the centre-right area is especially interesting, and we’ve glimpsed something already.

In these years, the Five Star Movement has in part updated its foreign policy stance. Can we consider it a pro-Atlantic party?

The belonging to a shared system of values and principles, such as those nested in the West, must be firm and unquestionable. However, belonging does not mean uncritical adherence to the way these principles and values are enforced outside our borders. There’s never been a rejection of the Atlantic collocation within the Movement, but rather the assumption that the adoption of certain positions must derive automatically and acritically from this collocation.

Can a clearer positioning of the Movement in Europe favour a political understanding with the next American administration?

I believe that the Movement’s positioning in Europe is an important matter, one that’s independent from the relations with the next American administration. It impacts, more generally, the Movement’s identity and future prospects, and it must be faced according to this logic. The matter should certainly be a priority after the Stati Generali [the upcoming internal organisation convention of the Movement], even if I know that our MEPs are working on it with patience and perseverance.

What will change in the US’ relationship with Italy? Do you expect more harmony with the current Italian government?

This theoretical line is presumable, but it will be necessary to measure this increased harmony against the many open dossiers. On some of those, the Biden administration will be, if possible, even more firm and assertive. I’m talking about an assertiveness that could be less “exhibited” than the previous administration’s, but equally decisive.

This being said, I believe that the coming years will present us with a great opportunity to cooperate on environmental matters, energy policies, and the planning of a future that will weave together sustainability and the fight against inequalities. In this sense, we expect a strong contribution from this administration.

In these years, you have cultivated a steady relationship with Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the American House of Representatives. What is your collaboration based on, and how will it continue?

With Nancy Pelosi – to whom I sent a letter of congratulations for her re-election at the House of Representatives – there have been in these years numerous occasions for confrontation, both bilateral and within the G7’s Presidents of the Parliaments meetings.

We’ve developed an excellent relationship and shared thoughts, both regarding matters of shared interest – for instance, around social changes caused by climate change – and, more recently, during the sad period of violence that followed George Floyd’s assassination. Above all, we talked about the approach to follow in order to contrast the pandemic’s diffusion, as well as the important role that parliamentary diplomacy can play during this period in history.

On these matters I was confronted with a passionate and tenacious partner, but also one that’s sensitive with regards to matters that I felt compelled to present her with, in my capacity as President of the Chamber [of Deputies], like the Chico Forti case.

There has been no lack of harsh divergences between the EU and the Trump administration. How could they relaunch the Transatlantic agenda? And in this regard, how do you assess the request for an increased European commitment to NATO? Can Italy do more?

I believe that this matter must be framed starting with a preliminary assumption: Europe has the authoritativeness to reinforce its dimension as an autonomous subject, one that’s central in the international theatre. Thus, it must develop a true foreign policy and a shared defence. It must speak with one voice, starting with the relations with Mediterranean and Near Eastern countries, as well as Central-Eastern European ones, and Russia. It must obtain a permanent seat at the UN Security Council.

Only within this context, in my view, can we discuss the matter of increased European commitment to NATO: the EU must be a pillar of the Alliance with equal dignity under all points of view. I’m convinced that we need to reinforce cooperation among NATO member countries in order to tackle the new challenges and threats of our time. I’m less convinced of the need to focus on individual elements – isolating them from a wider reasoning –, such as that of increasing military spending in relation to GDP.

Another matter at the top of the diplomatic agenda is the relationship with China, especially in the area of technology and 5G networks. Italy, through its foreign minister Luigi Di Maio, has reiterated its Atlantic positioning. Do you believe that it must take an additional step?

On this terrain, and more generally with regards to the US posturing towards China, it’s fair to expect a substantial continuity. [Mr] Biden has placed a particular focus on the technological and cybernetic threat, even on the campaign trail, calling all allies to a shared effort.

We never underestimated the risks and potential threats. And indeed, our country has undergone– and is undergoing – a great effort on this matter: it has equipped itself with norms and special powers, and it constantly monitors the tightness of the cyber perimeter’s boundaries. The attention is often focused on the assets and the great strategic infrastructures, but we have an all-round outlook and we strive to safeguard and preserve other realities, which may perhaps be smaller in dimension, but are a fundamental part of sectors and supply chains of strategic value.

The Biden administration is promising a more assertive approach towards Vladimir Putin’s Russia. The past months have seen a harsh confrontation between the EU and Russia on various dossiers, from the Belarusian crisis to the Navalny case. Has Italy made its voice heard enough?

As a country, we’ve expressed our indignation and our condemnation regarding the Navalny case, and we’ve asked for the carrying out of an actual inquiry. With regards to our relationship with Russia, I’d like to voice a further consideration.

When I was in Moscow, delivering a speech to the State Duma, I deemed it indispensable to reiterate that, for us, respecting international law is an undeniable value; that standing under a roof called Council of Europe invests everyone, according to their starting conditions, with some precise obligations, forcing us to look inwards. Because there cannot be cooperation, be it economic terms or international politics, if it’s disjointed from respecting the guarantees and principles of the rule of law, the defence of human dignity, the protection of political pluralism. Our posture, on this terrain, must be inflexible.

Finally, within the framework of this relationship, I express the strong hope for the renovation of the treaty on short and middle range missiles. With regards to that agreement, we noticed a worrying retreat from these shared principles and objectives which we have given ourselves as international community.

We expect, by contrast, a change in Middle Eastern policy. Do you believe that the Abraham Accords, rolled out by the Trump administration, must be safeguarded?

I believe that every effort should be made to promote the stability of the Middle Eastern region. The US administration handover could favour the re-entrance of the Palestinians in the peace accords, on the basis of precise guarantees regarding the maintenance of the two-state principle, and the suspension of annexations.

Accords with the Arab states are good, insofar as they are not done against someone or to isolate one or more regional actors. Instead, we need to step up innovation to build a peace process.

Furthermore, I believe that the new administration can contribute to better define the relationships between all of the actors who operate in the Central Mediterranean. I am referring in particular to Turkey, who has assumed – both in the Syrian and Libyan conflicts, and in their relations with some members of the Union – extremely questionable positions on the levels of policy and international law.

Is the time ripe for preparing a new agreement between the EU, the US and Iran, vis-à-vis denuclearisation?

The context has changed since the birth of that deal, so firstly we must understand the actual availability on both sides. At any rate, I believe that the US’ return in the riverbed of multilateralism will determine a renovated transatlantic cooperation in that regard. For instance, we’ll have to understand if the politics of sanctions will have had side effects, too, in terms of the strengthening of the most radical subjects within Iran. I believe that the EU and the US should rekindle their efforts to relaunch the dialogue with Iran, chiefly starting with attempting to obtain possible advancements in terms of respect of human rights and rule of law.

A war is being waged in Libya, a few miles from the Italian coasts. Do you expect a stronger US involvement?

I expect more commitment from this administration with regards to Libya, as to facilitate the solution to a conflict that is dividing a country that’s so close, geographically, and so strategic for Italian interests. We must continue to uphold with force the principle of non-interference, as well as the need to activate a constitutional process. From this standpoint, I find it interesting that at the centre of the intra-Libyan dialogue there are the heads of the two parliamentary assemblies of the country, the Tripoli-based High Council of State and Tobruk’s Chamber of Representatives. If it proves useful, the Italian parliament is ready to give its support to the ongoing process.

The environment and climate change will be priorities in the new White House. On which fronts can Italy and the EU collaborate with the US?

This is a primary domain, where more than any other there is no alternative to global cooperation and a firm and constant commitment on behalf of the US. This crisis has shown us some fragilities in the current system, and I believe that a more convinced approach towards planning in the name of sustainability is the way to overcome them. The new adhesion to the Paris accords, pre-announced by Biden, is certainly the first step towards collaboration in the fight to climate change.

Still, a lot remains to be done in order to give a concrete fulfilment to the accords’ commitments. In this sense, the next COP26 climate conference – jointly organised by the UK and Italy – will be a very important occasion. MPs will be able to give a decisive contribution through an ad-hoc meeting that we, as Italian Chambers of Parliament, are organising with the British Parliament.

In 2021 Italy will also be invested with the G20 presidency; it has already been announced that this event will be inspired by the three words people, planet, prosperity. A new model of development, centred on people, and environmental sustainability, will be the framework.

However, to make these objectives truly shared by all, I believe it necessary to add another p, that of parliaments. In fact, I am convinced that elective assemblies, who represent citizens directly, are indispensable to promote public policies geared towards guaranteeing a future that’s sustainable and socially equitable at the global level. The Italian Parliament will operate to build on these grounds a manner of debate and confrontation with other parliaments that’s adequate to the commitment that awaits us.

 

The interview was translated by Otto Lanzavecchia