The resignation of the euro-enthusiastic Italian Foreign Minister Renato Ruggiero, in protest at his colleagues’ negative attitude to the EU, has raised some disturbing questions for Europe. Other European governments, led by the French, are questioning Italian commitment to the whole European ideal and asking why Italy, alone of all the new eurozone states, had no official celebrations to mark the arrival of the new currency. Despite defending his position, Berlusconi remains under a cloud. He has so far failed to calm suspicions that his government is no longer a committed member of the European team. He claimed, unconvincingly, that Ruggiero had exasperated his fellow Cabinet members by seeking regular expressions of enthusiasm for the uniting Europe. According to Berlusconi, his government’s commitment simply did not need restating.
But that is not the way other European governments seem to be reading it. They are disturbed that Berlusconi’s political colleagues have taken to expressing disinterest in the European agenda, one even saying that he did not "give a hoot" about the euro. What is going on here, they wonder. One explanation may be the state of the Italian economy. Economists who analyzed the original ground plan for the introduction of the single currency were pessimistic about Italy’s chances of qualifying for founder membership. In their view, even if Rome managed to bring its budget deficit and debt ratio within the Maastricht criteria, it was doubtful if the country would be able to sustain the performance, as required. In the event, the figures were fiddled, not just for Italy but also for Belgium and France.
Italy’s finances have always been something of a mystery. Widespread tax evasion on a criminal scale has rendered the official figures dubious, at best. The emergence of the European Central Bank, with its need for clear data and its new eurozone-wide reporting procedures, appears to be placing considerable strain on the Italian system. Sources at the ECB are beginning to suggest that they have been encountering unnecessary obstruction by the Italian authorities.
Such a charge, if proven, would be serious. It may merely be that the complex Italian bureaucracy has still yet to reorganize itself in a Euro-centric way. There could, however, be a more sinister reason for the Berlusconi government’s lack of European community spirit. Just before the December summit, the Italians threatened to veto the creation of a EU-wide arrest warrant. Originally planned to deal with international terrorism, the warrant had been expanded to cover a range of other offenses, including tax evasion. Berlusconi has, in the past, been investigated by other European countries over his own tax affairs and those of his multimedia empire.
Many suspect that for this reason, the Italian premier threatened to veto the warrant’s introduction. At the last minute he was persuaded to back down, but he made it clear that he doubted if Italy would be able to meet the 2004 date for its introduction. It is unlikely that any other EU member would tolerate the conflicting interests of media ownership and government which Berlusconi has created in Italy. Is he, therefore, going cool on Europe, because he fears greater integration will examine his position, as both premier and media mogul, too closely?
