A subtle distinction. Silvio Berlusconi has said he is very pleased with the results of his term of European Council Presidency. He is probably alone in this. Other commentators were on the whole somewhat negative in their judgement, and sometimes very negative. But one distinction has been made. They have often made a distinction between the president himself and part of his team. Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini and Foreign Minister Franco Frattini have been described as impeccable (from the European point of view, of course) and the public administration as a whole has been widely appreciated. One example can be taken in passing from the last press conference held by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing. Taking into account the negative session of the IGC just before Christmas, the Convention Chairman said he felt "political lustre" had been lacking "despite the effort and the merits of Italian diplomacy". On hearing this, one journalist came to the conclusion that all Presidency responsibility for the failure was therefore to be ruled out. VGE interrupted him saying: "I said Italian diplomacy; I did not name the presidency".
Italy will keep its place. The existence in Italy of a sound pro-European base, not only in the population but also in the public administration, was noted by all those who had the opportunity to go there. People are of course disenchanted if not disappointed as they are everywhere in Europe. The (real) weaknesses of European construction and the Euro-sceptical attitude of most of the media and of part of the political class have left their marks. But less in Italy than elsewhere. The opposition is largely in favour of Europe. Within the majority, the pro-European faction is getting bigger. Ministers other than Mr Fini and Mr Frattini are stating their convictions, with sometimes less visibility. The book that Gianfranco Fini has devoted to his experience as a Convention member had a foreword by Vice Chairman of the Convention, Giuliano Amato, one of the pillars of the opposition in Italy. A pro-European network which is not showy but effective brings together personalities from both majority and opposition (and from diplomatic and administrative circles). Altiero Spinelli is back in fashion. In the other Member States, there is no doubt that, when the time comes, Italy will find its place in the future strengthened cooperation and other initiatives for reactivating integration.
The personal equation of Silvio Berlusconi is naturally a complex one and not always understood by those on the outside. One must note the fact that there are "conflicts of interest" resulting from the fact that the Prime Minister and the owner of the main television channels are one and the same person and that this does not seem to unduly upset most Italians. Despite fierce criticism, legal arguments and sarcasm from part of the press, the anomaly of the situation - which is unthinkable in other Member States - does not entail any real condemnation from Italian citizens. And that's a fact. Furthermore, some stances taken by Mr Berlusconi which are not in line with the EU guidelines would have quite easily been forgotten had the Prime Minister stated at what moment he was speaking as EU President and when he was expressing strictly personal views. But this equivocal risk has been over since 1 January.
For Italy, the euro is precious and essential. At the end of the day, what I consider as absolutely unacceptable are Mr Berlusconi's declarations against the euro. I believe that the case of a Prime Minister who criticises the currency of his country (the euro is the currency of Italy as of the other euro zone countries) is unique in history. But it is not just this political aspect that upsets me - it is also and above all the false nature of the arguments used. The Italian Prime Minister has but one fixed idea: single currency has taken away from the countries concerned the possibility to manipulate the exchange rate mechanism and is responsible for price rises. He pays no attention to the sometimes dramatic adverse effects of competitive devaluation, and pays no heed to the fact that, before the euro, his country had two figure interest and inflation rates. He ignores the fact that during the last devaluation of the lira other Member States had called for certain customs duties to be restored on Italian products to face up to the unfair competition. He ignores the fact that, without the euro, mortgage rates would be three or four times higher, or that interests on the State's debt would be an unbearable burden. The average rate of inflation of the euro zone is a little over 2%. If the rate is the highest in Italy, it is not the fault of the euro.
You may say these comments of mine come a little late, when the Council Presidency has already been passed on to Ireland (whose first steps are, moreover, very encouraging). But the public attack on television by Silvio Berlusconi against the euro came between Christmas and the New Year. The nature of his remarks, I feel, is unacceptable and demand a response, just as I feel a few words of encouragement are appropriate for those who, in Italy, still put their faith in a united Europe. Many Europeans I know congratulate them on this. (F.R.)