Letters
letters to the editor •
Putin’s threats against Europe and Sensi’s anger whilst reading Bonelli
Who wrote to the editor, Claudio Cerasa
31 JUL 26
Last updated: 09:01 AM
Translated by AI
Photo: Ansa
To the Editor – I see that Fratoianni, along with Conte, insists on saying that ‘Putin is not a threat’. Is the invasion of Ukraine, with millions of deaths, not enough for him? Is it not enough for him to see that Sweden and Finland have joined NATO in a great hurry, for fear of being invaded themselves? Are the covert operations across Europe aimed at destabilising the Union (starting with Britain) not enough for him? Are the killings of politicians and journalists not enough for him? What else must happen? Tell us how you measure danger. I fail to understand how the PD can even consider voting alongside such individuals, who pretend not to see what is happening. Evidently, they believe the public is gullible. It would be preferable to remain in opposition than to align ourselves with such people. And yet they persist in crunching the numbers to tally up support, with the accountant on duty. How unfortunate.
Roberto Cecchi
Speaking of no threat. Yesterday, a Russian missile – the type of which is still unclear – entered Polish airspace and crashed on Polish territory. According to NATO, it was one of numerous missiles launched by Russia against Ukraine during the night. Yesterday, NATO scrambled two fighter jets, both Polish F-16s, an Airbus A330 refuelling aircraft from NATO’s Multinational Multirole Transport and Air-to-Air Refuelling Unit, a Polish Saab 340 aircraft for airborne early warning (AEW), and a Polish Mi-24 helicopter. Over the past two years, Admiral Cavo Dragone said a few days ago, allied fighter jets have been scrambled around 700 times in response to Russian aircraft approaching our airspace or when they have violated it. If Mr Conte and his followers do not regard Russia’s overreach as a threat to Europe, let us hope that, at the very least, in the back of their minds, they do regard it as a threat to Europe that, after four years, a rogue state such as Russia continues to bomb Ukraine on a daily basis. Not to strike military bases, but to kill civilians. Is that not a threat for which it is worth helping Ukraine, Mr Conte?
To the Editor – A brilliant scientist, Albert Einstein also occupies a place in twentieth-century political thought. And he was not, as a certain popular narrative claims, an uncompromising pacifist (though few on the broad political spectrum are aware of this). As soon as he sensed the menacing shadows of Nazism, in fact, he displayed remarkable realism. On 20 July 1933, he replied curtly to a French pacifist who advocated conscientious objection: “I must tell you frankly that, under the present circumstances, if I were French or Belgian, I would not refuse military service; rather, I would perform such service willingly, convinced that I was thereby helping to save European civilisation” (“How I See the World”, 1934).
Michele Magno
To the Editor – I was not taken aback by the headline of Angelo Bonelli’s interview in "Il Foglio" yesterday, simply because I am, unfortunately, familiar with his views, which are – there is no denying it – consistent with a line of thinking that is not, and never will be, my own. Nor is it that of the Democratic Party. I must say, however, that reading those words, ‘no more weapons for Ukraine’, whilst Kyiv, Lviv and other cities were waking up amidst the rubble of one of the heaviest bombardments – a night spent in metro stations, children killed, dozens and dozens of wounded – filled me with rage, I confess. And it made me think of just how inadequate our statements are – all of ours, mind you – as we stand here acting like know-it-alls (I’m talking about myself), whilst every single day the Ukrainians have to defend not only their own lives but also our democracy and freedom as Europeans. It makes me want to say I wouldn’t even have a coffee with anyone who thinks that way, and that these views are on a par with those of the far-right League and Vannacci. But I cannot simply content myself with playing the saint who preserves his purity. Because it is certainly not our good reputation that helps Ukraine, but the concrete actions we will take, should we have the responsibility to lead this country. Which is why I won’t back down an inch on Ukraine, on building European defence – which even Bonelli, so to speak, claims to hold dear – or on where we must stand as a major European country. And it’s not enough for me to shrug my shoulders, whistle it off or work towards a compromise that falls short with those who don’t share my views. I defend and will always defend Ukraine, and I will fight to ensure that the coalition led by the Democratic Party lives up to the strength, courage and patience of the Ukrainian people.
Face it: we stand with Kyiv and will continue to do so, providing political, economic and military support to Ukraine. As the Greens across Europe are well aware – except here in Italy. Leave the grandstanding to Futuro Nazionale or the Lega. We can do better than this. Kind regards.
Filippo Sensi, a senator for the PD
To the Editor – There is ongoing talk of a broad coalition, of who will be part of it and who will lead it. But on what basis will it be formed? Can an election campaign really be built solely on populism and a punitive approach to justice, by bringing together forces divided on issues such as justice, Europe, the Atlantic Pact, Israel and Ukraine? An answer comes from Luciano Pellicani, a socialist intellectual who passed away in 2020 and was formerly editor of Mondo Operaio. On 3 March 2002, during an Olive Tree rally, he spoke words that remain relevant today. He attacked the ‘girotondi’ and the judicial left, recalling the opposition’s responsibility. “Demonising the opponent, presenting them as an enemy to be eliminated, means introducing an extremely dangerous virus into Italian politics,” he said. And he defined ‘permanent indignation’ not as political, but as anti-political. He denounced a “moral Aventine”, based on the idea that the majority wanted to establish a regime, and quoted Pietro Nenni: maximalism is the most serious illness afflicting the Italian left. Pellicani accused that left of relying on court rulings to defeat Berlusconi instead of developing concrete proposals. He was insulted and booed. But, more than twenty years on, the problem remains: a section of the opposition continues to seek populist and punitive shortcuts. A strong centre-left is possible, but it must be pragmatic, reconnect with the people and understand the needs and fears of the younger generations. Otherwise, the broad coalition risks failing before it even gets off the ground.
Gabriele Zammillo