Fassino: “There is no justification for violence”, and on security, not just prevention but also enforcement

Rome. The violence in Chiomonte, the No Tav construction site turned into a theatre of guerrilla warfare, the unrest in Bologna following the death of Abderrahim Fakir, the difficulty in identifying those responsible, and the political controversy surrounding the ‘Turin scenario’ – the city where, last January, the march in support of the Askatasuna social centre degenerated into clashes between protesters and the police. How can we prevent escalation and any form of association with the far left? And how should we discuss security? Piero Fassino, now a Democratic Party MP, former secretary of the DS, Minister of Justice and mayor of Turin, has previously published two forward-looking essays: “Tav – Why Yes” (published by La nave di Teseo, 2018, co-written with another former Democratic Party mayor of Turin, Sergio Chiamparino), and “Security and Justice” (published by Donzelli, 2001). Where should we start today? “In light of the events in Chiomonte,” Fassino tells Il Foglio, “there is no possible justification for those who use violence as a method of political action, because these antagonistic groups active in the Susa Valley do not want any debate on the TAV; they simply reject it, just as they reject any infrastructure, which they interpret as an expression of unbridled capitalism and imperialism”. It was a different matter, says Fassino, “with the movement that emerged in those areas between the 1990s and the 2000s – a movement that had its own reasons: for years on end, the Val di Susa had been the site of major investment with the construction of the Fréjus motorway, which for a long time was dotted with building sites. The local population feared a repeat of this with the TAV, which is why they protested, with the mayors at their side. At that point, the government appointed a new commissioner, the architect Mario Virano, a man who possessed both political sensitivity and professional expertise. The project was entirely redesigned according to the current route: no longer construction sites largely at ground level, but sites largely within tunnels – so much so that today the No Tav protests take place at the tunnel entrances. A section of the population and the mayors then agreed to participate in redefining the project, which led to the gradual decline of the initial movement, replaced by the emergence of an opposing movement’. However, No Tav banners also appear at Turin City Hall. “Stand up to the Five Star Movement. The Democratic Party mayor, Stefano Lorusso, has always spoken out explicitly in favour of the TAV, putting his reputation on the line, just as I and the former governors of Piedmont, Sergio Chiamparino and Mercedes Bresso, have done. And not for ideological reasons, but on the merits: 55 per cent of Italian exports to Europe pass through the western quadrant (the Iberian Peninsula, France, Great Britain and the Benelux countries), and the TAV in Val di Susa aims to shift to rail a flow of traffic that currently travels entirely by road – something the opponents may not even realise: they are protesting against the railway whilst there is a motorway along which hundreds of lorries pass every day; and a second tube for the motorway tunnel is currently being planned, with an environmental impact vastly greater than that of the railway. With the high-speed rail link, the Turin–Lyon journey will take around two hours, bringing about a radical change in the social and economic relationship between the two cities, creating major opportunities for investment, growth and employment’. Meanwhile, however, the left has a problem: isolating the violent protesters. Some say: do as you did in the days of the Italian Communist Party (PCI). “Prejudicial attitudes must be combated; we need a cultural battle,” says Fassino. But was there a problem of leniency towards the violent fringe groups in Turin and Bologna? “Absolutely not: neither in Turin nor in Bologna was there ever any tolerance, first on the part of the PCI-PDS-DS, and later on the part of the PD. We have always fought those who resort to violence, whilst engaging in cultural and political debate with those who protest peacefully.” Today, the centre-left, which is standing for government, also faces the issue of security. “Security,” says Fassino, “is a precious asset and a right of every citizen, recognised by everyone, including those on the left.” However, according to Fassino, a shift in approach is needed: “For a long time, the reasoning on the left has been: since much of the illegal activity has its social roots in marginalisation, poverty and the difficulties faced by young people, if those causes are removed, security is guaranteed. But this captures only part of the truth. When it comes to security, we must take a comprehensive approach. It is part of a security policy to consider how a local area is organised, how it is provided with social services, how an education policy is implemented, and how pockets of marginalisation and deviance are tackled. But it is equally important to put in place measures for prevention and enforcement: patrolling the area, ensuring the necessary police resources are available, and taking action to combat all forms of violence without any tolerance whatsoever. On this point, the Left must be just as determined as it is in working to remove the social causes of crime. And this is how we can defeat the Right’s exclusively security-focused approach.”