CORRIERE DELLA SERA
6 febbraio 2006
Il Cavaliere agli azzurri: netta divisione tra giudici e pubblici ministeri, ho intenzione di portare a termine la riforma della giustizia
«Se l’Unione vince il premier sarà D’Alema»
Berlusconi: Prodi è solo un uomo di facciata. Magari lo promuoveranno per rimuoverlo
ROMA - Prodi è solo un uomo di facciata, una maschera da presentare agli italiani. In realtà copre D’Alema, il comunista, il politico impresentabile, con un passato macchiato dall’ideologia. Silvio Berlusconi ieri pomeriggio ha telefonato alla manifestazione di Forza Italia a Roccaraso, «Neve-azzurra», e trovato una sfumatura nuova d’attacco alla sinistra: «Se dovessero vincere, ma non succederà, l’intenzione credo sia mettere D'Alema in poco tempo a capo del governo». Evocare l’instabilità degli avversari, richiamare alla memoria le crisi di governo degli anni dell’Ulivo, sono punti fermi della campagna elettorale del Cavaliere. Il Professore finora è stato definito il politico senza partito, mal sopportato dai Ds, già fulcro del vecchio sistema delle partecipazioni statali. Ieri il capo del governo lo ha dipinto in modo inedito, almeno nelle parole: «Mai gli italiani si sono fidati dei comunisti, dei post-comunisti, degli ex-comunisti e mai hanno voluto consegnare loro il governo. I comunisti lo sanno e in effetti si giovano oggi di un uomo, quelli che gli americani chiamano un "front man", un uomo di facciata come Prodi che nominano lì, credo per sostituirlo immediatamente. Magari lo promuoveranno per rimuoverlo». Su D’Alema invece, appena venerdì scorso, durante i lavori programmatici dei repubblicani, aveva mostrato indifferenza: «Di lui non me ne frega nulla....».
Eppure proprio con il presidente dei Ds, sino a qualche tempo fa, il capo del governo riteneva di poter coltivare uno dei pochi rapporti, se non di stima, almeno di non aperta conflittualità. Almeno fra i Ds. La vicenda Unipol ha spazzato via qualsiasi traccia di relazione. E da ieri Berlusconi dice: «Oggi non possono mettere D’Alema come loro candidato perché non sarebbe accettato da una parte di questa eterogenea coalizione, ma anche perché ha un passato comunista e ha sponsorizzato ciò che il comunismo ha fatto nel mondo».
Nella telefonata agli azzurri ribadisce poi l’intenzione di portare a termine la riforma della giustizia, in caso di vittoria: «Non tutti i nostri alleati avevano le nostre idee e quindi siamo stati frenati nel portare a termine quella riforma, che riprenderemo, e che dovrà arrivare a una divisione netta fra pubblici ministeri e i giudici». Poi rinnova un auspicio ispirato dalla storia recente, dalle legislature plurime di Kohl, Clinton, Reagan Aznar, Gonzales, della signora Thatcher, ovvero di quegli «statisti che hanno inciso profondamente nella vita dei loro paesi», avendo tempo a disposizione, quel tempo che Berlusconi chiede agli italiani per completare il suo lavoro: «E che abbiamo mostrato di meritare». Un motivo, a suo dire, per accontentarlo: «Non capisco come fanno Rutelli e la Margherita a stare con Rifondazione e i No global, con coloro che si oppongono a ogni modernizzazione del Paese e a qualsiasi grande opera».
Marco Galluzzo
*****************************************************************
4 febbraio 2006
«Da 15 anni al vertice ora spazio ai giovani»
I PROGETTI DI MASSIMO
«Siamo vicini a una svolta: da 15 anni esercito una funzione primaria nel maggiore partito italiano, è tanto». Lo ha detto il presidente dei Ds, Massimo D' Alema, secondo il quale «ci sono le condizioni perché possa occuparmi d' altro e che forze più giovani possano occuparsi del partito».
*****************************************************************
5 febbraio 2006
D' Alema e il suo futuro: spero di lasciare il vertice ds per un incarico istituzionale
FESTA DELLA NEVE DL
DAL NOSTRO INVIATO ROCCA DI MEZZO (L' Aquila) - «Sono diventato buono al di là dell' immaginazione, è un fatto esistenziale...». Massimo D' Alema a passeggio con Franco Marini sulla piazza di Rocca di Mezzo, tra un tè bollente e un bicchiere di vin brulé. Non il solito D' Alema, tagliente e corrosivo, ma un altro D' Alema, affabile e mai stanco di spiegare la tentazione di abbandonare la presidenza della Quercia per un incarico istituzionale. Davvero pensa di lasciare? «Spero di sì. Se riportiamo i Ds ad essere la prima forza del Paese, se andiamo al governo e si apre la costituente del partito democratico, è bene che qualcuno di noi si dedichi di più alle istituzioni È ora di fare largo a una generazione nuova, meno segnata dai conflitti di quell' epoca problematica a cavallo tra il partito comunista e la guerra fredda». D' Alema con sciarpa scozzese, Marini con pipa e berretto blu e un gran codazzo di cameramen e cronisti. Il perché di tanta attenzione lo spiega il deputato Renzo Lusetti, deus ex machina della festa dl sulla neve: «È un incontro tra i presidenti in pectore di Camera e Senato. D' Alema al Quirinale? Sul Colle si può salire anche da Montecitorio, come insegnano Scalfaro e Pertini». Marini sorride, sornione. «Giuro che non abbiamo parlato di organigrammi, solo uno sciocco lo farebbe a due mesi dal voto». La tensione del giorno prima pare svanita. «Come ti distrai un attimo, al tavolo delle candidature i Ds ti azzannano una mano» aveva detto il responsabile organizzativo dei Dl, ma il D' Alema in versione istituzionale smentisce la gelata: «Fa freddo, ma gelo non direi». Poi, a Marini: «Tu sai che io sono un signore, non mi sono mai seduto a un tavolo delle candidature, per queste cose ho sempre delegato degli incaricati...». Sosta al Mid Rock Cafè, dove D' Alema rivela una inedita passione per l' arrampicata sulle vette abruzzesi: quando scalava il Corno piccolo del Gran Sasso con il deputato dei Ds Giovanni Lolli e quando andava per mare con Ugo Pecchioli, «ai tempi in cui potevi avere una barca senza che ti rompessero le scatole». Difende Gerardo D' Ambrosio, «è stato un ottimo magistrato e porterà in Parlamento esperienza e competenze importanti» e attacca Silvio Berlusconi: «Delle tante bugie che ha detto, questa che l' Italia grazie a lui ha una grande posizione internazionale è la più ridicola». La strategia è abbassare i toni e stare alla larga dalla tv. «Il problema dei confronti deve valutarlo Prodi. Ma io non ci andrei a discutere con Berlusconi, lui cerca solo la rissa. Deve parlare da solo, perché è questo lo stile che ha dato alla sua campagna elettorale».
Monica Guerzoni
*****************************************************************
IL MANIFESTO
5 febbraio 2006
MASSIMO FOR PRESIDENT
di ANDREA COLOMBO
E D'Alema parte per il Colle
Massimo D'Alema annuncia che se l'Unione dovesse vincere le elezioni lui lascerà la presidenza dei Ds per un «lavoro nelle istituzioni». «Sono entrato nella segreteria del Pci nel 1986, quindi... (CONTINUA)
www.senato.it/notizie/RassUffStampa/060206/9ukyy.tif
*****************************************************************
www.repubblica.it/online/politica/commetre/america/amer...
LA REPUBBLICA
27 febbraio 2002
Un ciclo di conferenze nelle università
dopo le amministrative
E D'Alema parte per gli Usa
"Il mio nome divide"
Ripeto: il premier ha vinto perché ha avuto la maggioranza
del consenso. E' un fatto
di CONCITA DE GREGORIO
FIRENZE Massimo D'Alema se ne va. Lascia l'Italia, l'Ulivo e i girotondi, i professori e i morettisti, quelli che negli auditorium lo inseguono sotto palco coi cartelli: "Dì qualcosa di sinistra", o almeno "dì qualcosa". Li ascolta, li ha ascoltati anche lunedì sera fino a mezzanotte, a Firenze. Risponde, ha risposto fino a notte fonda, l'altra sera: capisco il vostro stato emotivo, ma sbagliate, gli ha detto. "Certo che ci vuole coraggio a venire qui nella fossa dei leoni", gli ha sussurratto un militante. Lui, sorridendo: "Mah, coraggio. Io sono abituato, sono stato una vita nelle piazze. E' normale". Adesso però può bastare: il processo è "comprensibile ma ingiusto", non deve durare all'infinito...
Sarà dopo le prossime amministrative, in primavera. Partirà per gli Stati Uniti: resterà almeno tre mesi, forse di più. Sarà per un ciclo di conferenze e di lezioni in una università del livello di Stanford. Una pausa lunga, una pausa di studio e di lavoro.
*****************************************************************
globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people2/DAlema/dalema-con.i0.html
ISTITUTO DI STUDI INTERNAZIONALI, UC BERKELEY
Quest'intervista fa parte della serie "Conversazioni con la Storia", e utilizza internet per condividere con il pubblico l'importante funzione di Berkeley come luogo di dibattito di idee di ogni provenienza.
globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people2/DAlema/dalema-con.e0.html
Conversations with History: Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley
This interview is part of the Institute's "Conversations with History" series, and uses Internet technology to share with the public Berkeley's distinction as a global forum for ideas.
Harry Kreisler interviews Massimo D'Alema, former Prime Minister of Italy (1998-2000)
This interview is part of the Institute's "Conversations with History" series, and uses Internet technology to share with the public Berkeley's distinction as a global forum for ideas.
Welcome to a Conversation with History. I'm Harry Kreisler of the Institute of International Studies. Our guest today is Massimo D'Alema who is the former Prime Minister of Italy and presently president of the cultural political foundation Italanianieuropei [Italians-Europeans]. In December of 2000, he was elected president of his party, the Democrats of the Left.
Background
Mr. D'Alema, welcome to Berkeley. Where were you born and raised?
I was born in Rome in 1949 and was raised in various Italian cities, namely in Genoa and Pisa. I then worked in Puglia, a region in the southern part of the country. My family is originally from the South. I am a delegate of the South, from Puglia, and I currently live in Rome. As president of the major opposition party, my work takes place mostly in Rome.
Looking back, how do you think your parents shaped your character?
My family, my parents, had a big role in shaping my character. My father was an official of the Communist Party, a deputy. He was a political man. He was part of the Resistance against Fascism, against Nazism. Undoubtedly, my passion for political life was shaped by my family's experience.
Did you talk politics around the dinner table?
Sometimes, but aside from family discussions, you could say we breathed politics -- it was in the air. I participated in the Communist Party's youth organization from the time I was a small boy.
Were there any historical events during the years that you were young that you recall and that helped shape the direction of your life?
Certainly, My relationship with politics -- one could say that I came from a family that was very influenced by political and historical events. I remember clearly important events in Italian history -- the antifascist movement of the 1960s and the major protest and popular revolt -- because, at the time, my father was the Secretary of the Communist Party in Genoa, which was the principal city of that mass movement. I remember later, in 1968, I participated in the protests and youth movement. I was in Prague during the Soviet invasion, and this event had a huge impact, not only on my political views, but on my personal development as well. Then in more recent years, I lived through many important historical moments, also because I was part of the Italian Communist Party leadership after 1975, and I aided in the direction of the Italian Communist Party, experiencing politics at its highest level.
Was it difficult for you to deal with the events in Czechoslovakia as a member of the Communist Party?
Yes. It was a difficult challenge, but fortunately the Communist Party [of Italy] was clearly opposed to the Soviet military intervention. I remember that this news came and spread throughout Prague right at the most dramatic moment of the Soviet occupation. I was filled with pride to be a part of a Communist Party that took an original and autonomous position, distinct from the orthodox parties of the Soviet persuasion.
At the university you studied philosophy?
Yes.
What did you take away from those studies that was helpful in your political career?
I think that philosophy is very useful in a person's general education, because it teaches you to pursue learning. It does not have a technical or pragmatic application, but it is extremely important in molding personalities. And so having studied philosophy has been very useful for me in my life.
Being in Politics
What are the skills that are required to be in politics? What are the virtues that are important for doing politics well?
In Italy, I would say patience. Patience, and the ability to support others, to take an interest in others. I think that politicians need to have two fundamental qualities: a vision of the future, a reasonable ability to see the future, to predict the future; and a large dose of altruism, in other words, attention to others. Not only to those currently present, but also toward the interests of future generations. These are the most important qualities for a politician to have: a well-defined vision of the future and, I would say, an interest in others. (The Catholics would say a "love" of others, but I find this term "love" excessive).
As a leader in the Communist Party you had to, in a way, bring all of these virtues to task before you, which was to lead the Left by creating a new party and leading it into the new millennium. What was involved in that set of tasks?
First of all, it needs to be said that the Italian Communist Party was a very peculiar party. It was a special party because it had a very strong democratic culture, distinct from other Communist parties. The Italian Communist Party was a great party, a great school of politics, not only because one studied -- one could say, in this respect, that it was actually a true school -- but because of the structure of the party. The pedagogic activity and the training component were very strong. And so it is important also to consider the cultural originality of Italian communism, which is strongly linked to Gramscian thought and the work of Togliatti. One could say that it was part of the heterodoxy of heretical communism -- a type of heretical communism. The transformation of the party in the face of the communist crisis, and the fall of the Berlin wall, was an act of great courage. It was one of those moments in which a vision of the future was essential. It was an act of great courage, and most militant communists saw it as a necessity. Yet, it was also the cause of suffering, a detachment from their past experiences.
The European Left
Did you have to define a set of discrete tasks to lead the party to its new identity?
In a way, the party's new identity worked well with our history. One could say that we liberated the content of our policies from an ideological cage. This is why the transformation of a political party always has roots. The party transformed itself on the basis of its real historical experience, which was already something quite different from the more orthodox communist tradition. Certainly, this was a difficult process, especially considering that its new identity moved it in the direction of the European socialist movement, which at the time was experiencing its own crisis.
That crisis, in particular in Italy, related to the deadlock, the gridlock, the sclerosis, and the corruption of the Christian Democratic Party that had dominated the country.
Yes, yes, without a doubt. There has been a general crisis in Italy's political system. For one reason or another, none of the parties that had shaped the history of our republic up until 1990 exist any longer. The Christian Democrats no longer exist. The Socialist Party no longer exists. And the Communist Party no longer exists. Everything was transformed under a wave of dramatic internal crisis, that is, the corruption and sclerosis of the governing parties, and internationally, the fall of the communist movement. And here I am referring to the fact that European socialism was facing new problems and challenges, not only in Italy. There was a basic crisis of the social democratic model. And so this was a phenomenon that involved all of Europe, not just Italy.
And that is a problem, in a way, that we are still dealing with, because the Left in the present period seems to be suffering from a malaise -- an inability to define a vision for the future, and to act on that vision. Is that interpretation correct?
It is politics in general, not only the Left, that is currently lacking a vision of the future. This is a political problem, because over the last few years the conviction that the economy is driving politics and that the role of politics is merely to implement economic imperatives has become widespread. There has really been a loss of political vision in general. It is clear that the Left has suffered more as a result, because it, in particular, needs a vision of the future. And so although the Left has managed this economic adjustment in Europe, it has not been successful in making its project appealing. It has not been capable of generating an attractive political project oriented toward the future. It is in this way that the cycle of the Left has exhausted itself, and I think that it is necessary for us to reconstruct the project of the European left. There is a very strong need for this.
You are suggesting two things: one, that to solve some of the contemporary problems, one has to move to a different arena, move to the European Union; and that has become a very important part of any political agenda that hopes to be successful for the future. Why is that so?
I think that single national states, even powerful states like the united states of Europe, are not able to confront the challenges of the contemporary world. As a result, Europe risks decline. It risks not carrying enough clout in the world arena. It risks seeing its social model called into question and losing the diverse cultural identities of which it is comprised. If we want to avoid a decline in Europe, we have to give birth to a supranational political power that is capable of giving Europeans pride, a sense that they count in today's world. This includes a vision of Europe as a global actor on the world scene, one capable of being an influential partner of the United States, able to promote European values. These are the values of democracy, of peace, and of individual liberty, but also those of social justice and solidarity in the construction of a new world order.
Before, you were suggesting that the Left's particular failure was [the failure] to mobilize public opinion to understand that reality -- the reality of the opportunities that lie in Europe. Why that failure, do you think?
Because the Left has remained too much of a prisoner of its traditional vision -- a vision that was the national experience of the welfare state. As a national experience, the welfare state strongly influenced different leftist currents in Europe, and the Left has remained a prisoner of this very noble, very important vision. Yet, it is a vision of the past. The Left has not had the strength to free itself from these nationalist ties. We have been left standing in mid-road. We have created a monetary union, but we are not able to create the conditions for stronger political unity.
If national parties are to be successful in broadening the vision of their constituents at home, who are the groups that they have to lead to this European vision? Where will the Left find votes in the future?
I believe, above all, that the Left needs to gain the approval of the younger generations. If we look today at the electoral structure in Europe, the Left appears to be having difficulty with the younger generations. Addressing the youth, in my opinion, is even more important than social aspects, even if we clearly need to think about a kind of social representation that is able to embrace part of the new European middle class. But I would stress the generational issue. The youngest generations, at this moment, are predominantly oriented to the Right. This is the biggest concern that we should have because it serves as evidence of a lack of vision today in the politics of the Left.
Do the young people vote for the Right because they perceive [the Left] as protecting the interests of the social groups that the Left used to draw on, which are incompatible with their own?
In part, this is true. In part, we can say that young people have the impression that social deregulation can favor their interests with respect to more organized, traditional interests. In part, the Right offers a distorted, yet strongly appealing prospective of identity. Today, the different European Rights have a strong nationalist/localist character, which is, at times, distorted. Nevertheless, they present themselves as having a strong identity, with a strong call to roots, to membership, to community, to the land, to blood ties. These are all strong values, with respect to which, the Left's values -- good administration, social equilibrium, and social peace -- appear weak. I believe this is probably a more serious problem.
When you hosted the conference on the Third Way, and had as your guest, among others, President Clinton, in your remarks you mentioned what the progressive leaders from around the world could learn from each other. What do you think the United States can learn from Europe and the European experience and what do you think Europe can learn from America?
I think that the United States can learn from Europe that the international crisis of our times should be dealt with first through politics, and then, only if it is absolutely necessary, with the use of force. That is, today's world needs to find political solutions, and Europe has a great tradition of politics. Europe, on the other hand, must learn from the United States to be a little less Machiavellian, and to conduct its foreign policy on the basis of clearly defined principles. Europe tends to overprivilege diplomacy, even when it finds itself in front of a dictator negotiating human rights. By contrast, the United States tends to view politics as power politics. I think that globalization needs a mix between American firmness, when it is necessary, and the European tradition of political diplomacy.
Looking back on your philosophical training, what is the balance between theory and practice, as you lead your constituents into a new era?
First of all, there are theories that give practical application a high priority, and so it depends. I think one needs to choose the right theory. This is the problem. I consider philosophical thought as a kind of bag of tools, like a toolkit. The most important thing is to use the right tool -- the one that is most appropriate to the task at hand. Philosophical thought offers us instruments. The important thing is to know which instrument to choose for dealing with the concrete problem that you have in front of you.
As Europe and Italy embrace a common European solution to address globalization, it still will have to try to maintain the commitments to social justice, to democracy. Will new instruments develop, new political formulas, for making that possibility of globalization with democracy a reality?
I think that European unity can have a significant effect. A strong and united Europe is not sufficient, but it can contribute to molding globalization on the basis of shared values. I consider globalization to be a positive, rather than a negative development. I am not part of the "No Global" movement, but I do think that it brings with it great contradictions: it reduces the space for democracy, it calls to question diverse identities, and it produces inequality. We need to govern this process according to the objectives of justice and peace. Without a sense of justice, there is no security. And so our values -- the values of democracy, individual liberty, equal opportunity-- will not be able to survive if they remain confined to the Western world, because the logic of global competition will put them in crisis. We need to find a way to affirm these values throughout the world. The rights of European workers can be defended only if they become the rights of Asian and Latin American workers. Otherwise, we will lose these rights also in Europe. This is the problem. This really requires new ideas from the Left.
If you were trying to draw a picture of what the European voter is worried about these days, what would be in that picture, and what are the policy solutions to respond to it?
I think that the reasons for the Right's victory-- that is, the orientation of the European voters at the moment -- have to do, in my opinion, with the fact that voters are conditioned by a sense of fear -- fear in the face of immigration, which in Europe, is a big problem. Our society is a rather closed society; we fear petty crime and widespread crime that appears to be linked to immigration. In the face of immigration, there is also the fear of losing privileges, of losing security, also social security. It seems that at the moment, the Right knows how to take advantage of this sense of insecurity, which is also a product of globalization. Naturally, this is also a result of the fact that the Left has, unfortunately, not known how to put a positive face on globalization. It has not been able to portray this process as a possibility for growth, which globalization needs to be and can be. And so at the moment, the Right is prevailing because a feeling of fear and insecurity is prevailing in public opinion.
Lessons Learned
Do you think that Europe will move towards a common foreign policy?
I think that this is an absolute necessity, not only for Europe, but also for achieving an international balance of power. And I believe that we are making progress. That is, compared to ten years ago, there is beginning to be a European foreign policy.
One gets the sense as I listen to you that an important requirement for doing politics at the national level and at the international level is courage. We don't have enough courage among political leaders in the West, or, to say it better, we should have more. Would you agree with that?
Yes. Without a doubt I would say that politics needs courage in order to explore new ground, with respect to the things that we have already learned and with respect to more traditional ideas. There is always a risk, a danger, for politicians to explore new ground. There is always the risk of failure. Yet, in standing still, failure is assured. I believe that this need to have the courage to take risks is very strong.
How would you advise students to prepare for the future, if they want to go into politics?
I believe that at this moment politics is not attracting very many young people. Yet we have a great need for young people to get excited about politics. I would advise young people interested in political life to get to know the world. Our training was very restricted, very provincial. There was the idea that in order to learn politics you needed to do politics, starting with a basis in political activism. Today, I think that we need a generation that comes to politics after having studied and known the world.
If a young person were to watch the video of this interview, what lesson would you recommend they learn from this very fascinating odyssey that you have taken as a political leader?
When I was a young Italian Communist, I would have never dreamed of having the kind of life I have led -- leading a government, which included an ex-governor of the Bank of Italy, a government that, together with the United States, went to war, as we did in Kosovo. If I really had to think back to the time when I was a young Communist representative, if someone would have said something like this to me, I would have laughed. I would have considered it a joke, or a provocation.
Above all, our political development shows that politics is a fascinating adventure, open and unforeseeable. The important thing is to have a basic consistency. By this I mean ideological consistency, a consistency of principles and of values. I would say that this is important: being open to politics as a fascinating experience, unexplored and rich with possibilities, and at the same time, to experience it remaining faithful to the principles and values that you work toward.
Well, on that very positive note, Mr. Prime Minister, thank you very much for visiting the Berkeley campus and for participating in this fascinating interview. Thank you.
Thank you.
And thank you very much for joining us for this Conversation with History.
© Copyright 2002, Regents of the University of California