Conte is delaying, but it is time for clarity on Ukraine. And primaries as soon as possible

The PD has been saying for months that the primaries will go ahead, of course, but later. First the manifesto, then the candidate. First you set the table, then you decide who will sit at the head of it. Giuseppe Conte, however, changed the order of events yesterday. The Ukraine issue, he said, will be resolved through the primaries: “We’ll let the Italians decide.” If he wins, there will be no new military aid to Kyiv and a European push for a breakthrough in negotiations. Very good. Or rather: very bad on the substance, very good in terms of clarity. Because Conte is wrong about Ukraine. 

It is remarkable that, after years of Russian invasion, we are still having to debate whether it is appropriate to assist a country under attack in defending itself. To say that Kyiv is the victim and then take away the means for it to resist is a rather creative way of standing by the victim. And the idea of resolving everything by first calling Zelensky and then Putin risks turning a war of aggression into a matter for the phone book. Conte has, however, reiterated that the M5S will not vote for new military aid, whilst supporting sanctions and economic aid.

But let’s leave the merits aside for a moment. As far as the method is concerned, who is right?

The PD maintains that the manifesto must be drafted before the primaries. Conte says that a key part of that manifesto – namely, policy on Ukraine – will be decided by whoever wins the primaries. The two things are mutually exclusive. Either the stance on Kyiv is established beforehand, becomes a binding condition for everyone, and anyone who does not agree with it is excluded from the coalition; or the stance will be decided afterwards by the winner, in which case it is not true that the manifesto precedes the choice of leader.

It’s one or the other. Or perhaps both Conte’s.

A few days ago, during the programme ‘In Onda’, the editor-in-chief of Il Foglio asked Stefano Bonaccini why the centre-left – which considers the parliamentary term to be over and claims to be ready to govern – was not swiftly presenting its manifesto and holding its primaries straight away. Bonaccini described the request as ‘childish’. But childish in what sense? Because we presume to know who will lead the coalition? Because we are asking a political force ready for elections to state with whom it wants to govern and to achieve what? Because it would be premature to know the stance of a potential Italian government on Ukraine?

Following Conte’s remarks, the response is even more urgent. If support for Kyiv is a non-negotiable issue, the PD must state this before the primaries and ask Conte whether he intends to accept it. If, on the other hand, it is a matter to be decided by the vote of the wider coalition’s electorate, then it will be the primaries that shape the programme, not the other way round.

And at this point, why wait? Why carry on with this curious Schrödinger’s coalition – ready to govern but not yet ready to say who will lead it, united yet divided over Ukraine, in favour of primaries provided they are held as late as possible?

Conte is wrong about Kyiv, but he has done a service to clarity: he has reminded us that a leader is not merely the voice-over artist for a script written by others. The leader sets the agenda. If Schlein wins, the broad coalition will have one policy; if Conte wins, it will probably have the opposite one. Pretending that the difference can be concealed within some diplomatic formula is not serious: it is procrastination.

So the question is simple. Will the party line on Kyiv be decided before the primaries? If so, can those who do not agree with it really remain in the same coalition? If not, why does the PD keep saying that the manifesto will come first?

Announce the date of the primaries straight away and hold them as soon as possible. That’s it. Then at least we’ll know what sort of field we’re up against.