What the "case of Austria" has proven. Every one of us has reacted to the results of the Italian elections according to personal conviction, preference and sympathy. But those who have expressed fears or concern about the risk that Italy will slide towards behaviour that is incompatible with the fundamental principles of European construction are forgetting, I believe, an essential element: the guarantee provided by the very existence of the EU against risks of this kind. The case of Austria has sometimes been cited as a precedent. And indeed, it has gone to prove:
- the finicky attention with which events in a Member State are followed through in all the others. Not only governmental programmes but any declaration, stance or interview is picked over, commented on and possibly criticised. That is what a Community is.
- the importance that the country which is subject to such attention attributes in fact to the judgement of the rest of Europe. Today, the colonels would not be able to seize power in a European country belonging to the EU. At the time when the Austrian situation was under suspicion (albeit unjustified according to Vienna), the government and the president of the Republic had signed a text reaffirming their loyalty to all the principles underlying the European treaties, a solemn commitment that would never have existed without the EU. Any excess or blunders noted after this were not attributable to Vienna but rather to other capitals.
- a "preventive procedure" was introduced by the Treaty of Nice, allowing the Council to note (after binding assent from the European Parliament) the eventual existence of a "clear risk of grave violation" of the fundamental rights by a Member State and to make the appropriate recommendations to that State. All Member States may be subject to this procedure but none would like to be in such a situation. An Italian political movement - Mr Bossi's - had been pinpointed by observers and international commentators for its xenophobic remarks. It was sanctioned by voters, receiving no more than 4% of votes cast. Worse has been known elsewhere.
"Continuity" in Italy's European policy? The provisions of the Treaty (despite the fact that the Treaty of Nice is not yet in force) and above all the awareness of being part of a community have an effect even before elections. It is no secret that Silvio Berlusconi had offered a place in his future government to Mario Monti, European Commissioner, and to Renato Ruggiero, whose career has essentially unfolded in Community or international institutions. With these offers, the future Italian prime minister was obviously aiming at two things: to reassure Europe and to nip in the bud any vague wish on the part of any member of his team to slide off the rails. The failure of his approach will not change these two aims, that will be followed up with other measures, indicating that Mr Berlusconi will no longer commit some of the errors that left a stain on his first experience as head of government. He has said he is aware of Italy's obligations under the "growth and stability pact", not only regarding budgetary balance but also as far as pension reform is concerned. As for the debate on the future of the Union, it is obviously impossible to anticipate the position of the new government. When calling for votes, ,Mr Berlusconi simply spoke of "continuity" in his country's European policy. He did not need to say anything more, as once again in the political elections of a Member State, the European theme was not among the issues carrying votes and consensus.
Matters that do not come under Europe. These generally encouraging remarks obviously do not concern the new Italian government's relations with the European Union. They do not even fleetingly touch upon national affairs in which the States remain sovereign, or questions that had been raised by the international press about anomalies or "conflicting interests", or Silvio Berlusconi's legal troubles, all purely internal matters or matters pertaining to justice, it being up to the person concerned and to the national parliament to solve them.
For those who like neither Berlusconi's personality nor his policies, nor his allies, one can only recall one obvious fact: democracy does not mean that power is given to those we support but to those chosen by the majority. Just to make a point. It is normal that the discontented will fight to make things change. And in the meantime, results must be accepted with serenity, especially by those who do not like them.
(F.R.)