Conte vs Renzi. Guerini: “No to vetoes”. The broad coalition (including IV) rallies behind Conte and opposes rearmament. The problem remains Kyiv

Rome. Giuseppe Conte and his allies have been raising the spectre of vetoes for days, continuing to demand assurances from Matteo Renzi (and indeed from Elly Schlein). Meanwhile, he takes credit for the outcome: “We are truly proud to have united the opposition behind our ‘no’ to rearmament”. In response to attacks from the M5S, the leader of Italia Viva retorts sharply: “Someone has to oppose the right whilst others are having (bad) fun with friendly fire.” The dispute within the broad coalition continues. Lorenzo Guerini sends messages to his allies: “No to vetoes. We must build a balanced and credible alliance.” But yesterday, at least for a day, the dispute was resolved in a joint document on the DFDP and the budget deviation, endorsed by the entire centre-left, including Italia Viva and +Europa (with Riccardo Magi, who, before Schlein’s phone call, had even threatened to withdraw his signature over procedural issues and a text he considered too heavily focused on AVS and the M5S). It is a small step forward, but it does not dispel the discontent or the divisions which, even today – despite some attempts at unity – will resurface regarding Ukraine, where positions remain far apart, during the debate following Meloni’s statements ahead of the European Council.

To summarise the draft budget document (DFDP) and respond to Giancarlo Giorgetti: on Monday, the sherpas from the broad coalition worked late into the night, in a back-and-forth between the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, where an agreement was finally reached on a text whose second point “commits the government to radically reconsider the spending commitments made within NATO and to prevent further increases” in armaments: an end to the 5 per cent target for the Atlantic Alliance and no similar proposals of any kind for the future. In early August, when the NEC was debated in the Chamber, in the text drafted by the M5S-PD-AVS coalition, that word ‘radically’ was contained in the preamble. Yesterday it became a commitment, one that extends to the centrists but allows the Conti supporters to rejoice. For IV group leader Lella Paita: “The text isn’t perfect, but it’s a starting point.” She highlights the passages on the need for a European defence: “A concept we have always upheld.” Guerini tries to look on the bright side: “It’s good enough for today.” He also finds the criticisms of the increase in NATO spending acceptable. And then: “Europe’s strategic autonomy is recognised.” But there are certainly some “ambiguities” regarding defence spending that will need to be clarified. “You can’t escape the maths,” continues the former Democratic Party Defence Minister, “but that alone isn’t enough. It’s positive that we’ve arrived at a document signed by everyone. Reformists have long been calling for Iv and +Europa to be included at the negotiating table. The resolution moves in this direction.” In the Senate, here is Francesco Boccia, who has just left the Chamber. What does the PD group leader think of Conte’s vetoes? “It’s the facts that count, and today they tell us that on the most political document there is, there is coalition unity, including the passage on defence.” Others in the PD also believe that the former prime minister’s stance is entirely geared towards the primaries and his contest with Schlein. And it is no coincidence that the leaders of the PD and the M5S are chasing each other’s coattails in various initiatives without ever crossing paths. An example? Yesterday, at the student-organised housing protest outside Montecitorio, Schlein left at 4 pm, just as the M5S leader was due to arrive.

Nicola Fratoianni, however, is not making a big deal of it; rather, he is delighted with yesterday’s joint document, comprising 21 points addressing social and economic issues: “A draft programme”, according to the co-leader of AVS, which this time also bears the signature of IV and includes some of Renzi’s proposals, such as the Start Tax for young people. It is, however, a truce that appears fragile in any case, because the real problem concerns the defence of Kyiv. Today, the broad coalition will once again scatter: “It’s a knot that cannot be untangled overnight,” says Giuseppe Provenzano. There will still be much to discuss, all the more so if it is to be the main topic for the M5S’s campaign stalls. But they are poring over dictionaries and textbooks on international law. “Making aid to Ukraine conditional on a road map that would require Putin’s approval is politically incomprehensible and morally unacceptable,” Guerini adds. “It is quite another thing to say: let us continue to help Ukraine, and work towards negotiations.” Meanwhile, some leaders close to Schlein are hinting at another approach: financial support for Zelenskyy – so that the Ukrainian government can use those resources for weapons as well – could pave the way for a broad-based agreement. Although this might not please all the reformists. Why is that? “It’s not clear whether they’re interested in supporting Kyiv or in securing contracts for certain companies.”

Ruggiero Montenegro