Mattarella challenges the fake pacifists

Welcome, everyone. Thank you, Chair.

It is a real pleasure to welcome you to the Quirinale for this annual event, which – as we all know – originated in the Chamber of Deputies and was extended, with the Republic, to the Senate.

In the Chambers, the respective Speakers act as guarantors, though they are, in any case, political figures. The position of the President of the Republic is different, as he stands outside the political debate: the nature of this meeting is therefore different. It originated, in its time, with the so-called ‘Quirinalisti’ as an occasion to exchange summer greetings and was replaced, twenty-four years ago, by the courteous presentation of the ‘Ventaglio’.

You, Mr President, spoke of the complex situation currently facing the international community, which is beset by uncertainties that were unforeseeable until just a few years ago. These uncertainties are causing confusion regarding future prospects and raising questions about the reliability of points of reference that, until recently, were perceived as offering clarity and stability.

Those who feel a sense of responsibility recognise the need to safeguard the multilateral system and, in order to restore its stability, to reform it so that, drawing on reality, it is equipped with forms and instruments suited to the world as it is today, rather than as it was between the late 1940s and the 1950s.

As you said, there are expectations from various quarters that Europe will take the lead in this regard: this was clearly called for by the Canadian Prime Minister, Carney.

It is no coincidence that this anticipation exists, because in just a few years, by pooling its current commitments and future prospects, Europe has managed to transform itself from a continent torn apart for centuries by conflicts and bloody wars into the largest area of peace and shared development. It is hardly surprising that this area attracts people from all over the world.

The European Union is neither passive nor silent in the face of this call for accountability, despite difficulties of all kinds, both internal and, above all, external in origin.

I would like to emphasise the ongoing development of an ever-increasing number of free trade agreements – whether concluded or currently under negotiation – with vast regions across different continents – from Canada to Japan, from South America to India – as well as agreements with other countries or regional blocs that bring them together. These agreements and arrangements encourage collaboration and a shared commitment to mutual benefit.

In this way, a message is presented to the global community: a model of international relations that offers an alternative to trade disputes or, regrettably, military conflicts – and sometimes even war.

Europe is presenting a path to peace, in contrast to attempts to return to barbarism in international affairs by reinstating the law of the strongest – a law which, as we are seeing at present, is of dubious effectiveness.

I am well aware of the criticism levelled at the Union for the lack of impact of its actions – criticism levelled relentlessly, above all by those who, in every way and under all circumstances, stand in the way of more effective decision-making and operational tools.

I am well aware, of course, and fully recognise that in various fields the Union must adopt a far more dynamic approach. This is yet another reason why it was unwise to let the massive effort promoted by the European Parliament in 2022 – under the presidency of David Sassoli – with the Conference on the Future of Europe, an initiative that had involved millions of European citizens, fall by the wayside.

The decision to abandon the idea of a new European Convention to tackle the reform of the Treaties was a serious mistake.

A serious and courageous re-examination is needed

In the meantime, it’s not a question of sitting idly by waiting for tomorrow.

It is worth recalling that, as is well known, two major initiatives such as the euro and Schengen – I emphasise: the single currency and the free movement of people across most EU countries – were established within the current legal framework as forms of enhanced cooperation; and that participation in these has steadily expanded.

You also mentioned the need for an effective common European defence.

The approach and strategy I have just outlined make it clear that its implementation poses no threat to anyone and is not aimed at war: on the contrary, it is a tool for ensuring peace.

We are facing an escalating scenario of conflicts that is fuelling a crisis stretching from the Mediterranean to the Gulf, reaching the Indian Ocean and bringing war to the heart of Europe: given the number of countries involved and the people suffering, it is hard not to recognise the global scale of this situation and the responsibilities that arise from it.

As regards the domestic political life of our country, you are all aware of the necessary limits to my comments.

These limitations do not represent a constraint: on the contrary, they represent one of the ways in which the Quirinale fulfils its duty to ensure impartiality and to remain detached from the debate – the legitimate debate – between the political parties.

Naturally, I always hope that this will take place in a spirit of mutual respect; without inappropriate verbal aggression, which is often unwarranted and, in my view, also counterproductive.

I hope that the electoral tensions – which, to be honest, are still rather untimely – do not divert attention from the issues affecting the daily lives of our fellow citizens, nor lead to a distortion of the reality of the situation.

It is not my place to intervene in parliamentary proceedings, and I do not intend – as is understandable – to discuss legislative proposals currently under consideration by Parliament, which I will be called upon to examine should they be referred to me.

I make no secret of my concern – which I have expressed on many occasions – regarding the growing phenomenon of low voter turnout. This phenomenon, when addressing electoral issues, should be the main focus for all political parties, taking precedence over any other aspect.

As for the rest, it is not my role to formulate or express judgements or opinions on political issues.

Rather, my role involves identifying needs and encouraging reflection – a reflection that extends beyond the immediate circumstances.

You have just recalled the words with which, regarding the momentous and global phenomenon of migration, Leo XIV appealed to the consciences of those throughout the world who hold positions of institutional responsibility.

Personally, I consider the Pope’s view – which I fully endorse – to be indisputable: namely, the absolute necessity of setting aside the ‘emergency’ mindset – which is entirely unproductive, as is now beyond doubt – and of committing to a strategic approach to managing the situation. A strategy that is both feasible and sustainable. It is the only strategy capable of averting the otherwise inevitable alternative fate: that of suffering chaotic consequences and trying – in vain – to silence our consciences in the face of what is happening.

It is understandable and appropriate to focus on the circumstances and issues faced by those arriving in our country. I hope that at least some of this attention is also directed towards those who are leaving: the many young people who are moving abroad not by choice but out of necessity.

You mentioned some of the topics covered in the debate that has been taking place over the last few days on political issues – or rather, to put it more accurately, between political parties.

I, of course, will not be getting involved: I am not part of it and have no intention of being part of it.

I shall limit myself to a single observation which I hope will give you food for thought.

In a civilised society that offers reassurance to its citizens, individual behaviour must comply with common rules – those laid down by law. If, on the other hand, this principle were turned on its head and it were thought that the rules of law should adapt to individual, ad hoc behaviour, changing their content from time to time, on a case-by-case basis, this would not strengthen security but would amount to the state abdicating its responsibilities.

There are other aspects of life in Italy that require particular attention: amongst these, I wish today to highlight the necessary and indispensable fight against violence.

It is unacceptable for the belief to take hold that, if one’s views are in the minority within society, it is justifiable to resort to forms of violence that undermine the free democratic will of the Italian people as expressed through the institutions provided for by the Constitution. A sort of ‘do-it-yourself’ approach, where everyone is free to act as they please with regard to the actions of public authorities, that is, local authorities.

What took place – most recently – on Saturday in Val di Susa is unacceptable: the very foundations of democratic coexistence are being called into question, and there can be no hesitation or reticence in condemning and countering such aggressive behaviour.

Violence is a lethal virus for democracy and social life.

Those who practise the Constitution, those who preach it and those who justify it are attacking it.

This is accompanied by a phenomenon that has been repeatedly highlighted in the pages of various newspapers and which requires greater responsible attention from everyone, both in society and in political life. The phenomenon of a sort of indignant refusal not merely to share but to listen to the opinions of others: it is hardly surprising that this gives rise to a climate of mutual intolerance and fanatical hostility that helps to sow the seeds of violence.

I agree, Mr President, not merely out of politeness but out of deep-seated conviction, with your reflections on the journalistic profession.

The European Media Freedom Regulation came into force on 8 August 2025 – one year ago – laying down rules, applicable with immediate effect, concerning – amongst other things – editorial independence, the content of major digital platforms and the independent operation of public service media.

The delay, even in Italy, in fully implementing guidelines to which the EU governments themselves and Members of the European Parliament – representing the various Member States – have contributed, is difficult to understand.

The essential role of information in democratic systems, particularly in public services, must be free from ambiguity.

It is to be hoped that, in the meantime, a solution will finally be found to the paralysis of the public radio and television system caused by the deadlock in the work of the parliamentary committee, whose very name reflects its importance in setting the general direction and overseeing radio and television services.

I have repeatedly pointed out that freedom, information and democracy are interdependent.

Journalists are witnesses to events. When they are prevented or hindered from carrying out this task, it is not merely an attack on individual professionals but a blow to us all, because freedom is an indivisible right.

As noted in the European Commission’s Report on the Rule of Law, addressing numerous Member States, including Italy, “freedom of the press must be guaranteed, taking into account European rules on the protection of journalists”.

As you pointed out, a more general issue has since arisen: that concerning the use of Artificial Intelligence in news generation.

This is an issue you have also raised recently.

News clones, artificially generated by machines. Destined to reproduce endlessly across the web, without any verification, and further multiplied by machine translation tools: can we really consider them to enrich the cultural and informational landscape?

What facts do they bear witness to?

Can there be such a thing as news without journalists?

Information is not a duplicate of itself.

It is not a caricature of Dolly the sheep.

Furthermore, in day-to-day use, errors in the responses and analyses provided by artificial intelligence tools are beginning to accumulate.

People’s beliefs and values, as well as the way they go about their daily lives, also depend on free, independent and in-depth information.

A precious value known as freedom depends on it.

This is a duty and a responsibility for media professionals.

Thank you very much for the gift of this beautiful fan – "Speranza" – and I would like to congratulate its creator, Piero Malatesta Piano, and wish him all the very best for his future as an artist.

And – speaking of best wishes – have a great summer break, everyone.