AN APPEAL FOR NATO TROOPS IN IRAQ

Like all other Italians, we grieve over the fate of the hostages in Iraq. But we find comfort in that sense of responsibility and unity which this country's media and political leaders, included those belonging to the opposition parties, have so far evidenced. This should help us not to fall into traps and to do our utmost in order to obtain that humanitarian solution which we all hope for.

But we strongly believe that the frontier of Iraq's stabilization is our own frontier, as Italians and Europeans, and the frontier of the international community as a whole. A real and effective security will be granted only by a victory in this struggle for pacification. Therefore, we make a proposal that, to our judgment, will contribute to Iraq's pacification, grounding it on the right of Iraqi people to have free elections by January 2005.

Our proposal, which could be presented to Nato and the UE by the Italian government, is the following. A strong Nato contingent should be immediately sent to Iraq to protect the right of the Iraqi people to vote and choose their own Parliament, Constitution and government. As it is well known, today there is a pressing need for more soldiers to protect the ballot boxes from terrorist attacks; but since these attacks concerns us directly, we, as human beings and as Europeans, have to provide those soldiers.

On the political level, the realization of this proposal would be a crucial factor of stability, an unmistakable signal given to the enemies of peace and democracy in Iraq. It would also be a way to comply with a specific request of the United Nations, which, in their recent resolutions, have called for an active intervention, even military if necessary, by the international community. Such a move is invoked also by Baghdad's ad interim government, appointed with the help of Lakhdar Brahimi, UN's special envoy, and has already a precedent in Nato's decision to participate in training the new Iraqi army.

In other operational models, such as Afghanistan or the Balkans, this is precisely what has been done. The Russian Federation, for example, was opposed to the Kosovo war, but it now gives its contribution, together with Nato and under UN's leadership, to the effort of stabilization. And it could become an actor in this proposal, making operative the consultative provision established in the Pratica di Mare Summit.

The real problem is to clearly define an international political line of development, going beyond the legitimate disagreement of the times preceding the Iraq war, and to effectively help with a true assumption of responsibility which cannot but concern Nato and Europe (enlarged to 25 countries), two basically coextensive entities. The temporary and limited scope of the Nato mission proposed by Italy, intended to grant for a certain time the right to peace and to the creation of an embryo of representative goverment in Iraq, could be more easily accepted by those European governments which, two years ago, manifested their opposition to the war. The European public would support a military intervention fully dedicated to the realization of an unquestionable goal: the enforcement of peace and the protection of human rights in a country with 25 million inhabitants, the very right to vote, against which bin Laden's terrorists fight, being one of the most fundamental human rights.

We also believe that this could represent a decisive turning point toward a more responsible commitment by the countries of the Arab League: chaos is the enemy of everyone living in the Middle East. The organization of free elections in Iraq should be the aspiration of everybody, because to remain watching without doing anything does not help the supranational interest of Europe nor the national interest of any European country. And we all know that Nato troops are the only ones ready and well trained, quickly deployable in a difficult terrain such as Iraq.

A Nato agreement which would eliminate possible concerns about the link with the local headquarters of the Coalition forces is not difficult to envisage. Through this Italian proposal, Nato would not be generically involved in the war against Iraq, as some superficial canvasser will be quick to say. On the contrary, it would be committed to a mission of peace enforcing, with international resonance and value, according to a precise and pre-established time-schedule for the withdrawing of the troops after the elections; the ultimate end being the realization of one of the objectives which have produced the Atlantic Alliance and its enlargment toward the East: the effective protection of the world's security and peace after the end of the cold war.

The Europeans who have objected to the war can and must consider a way which could lead to the limited but thoroughly justified goal of strengthen the Atlantic Alliance on this crucial issue which, we emphasize, has the approval of the United Nations: helping Iraq to build for itself a new life of peace and democracy, however difficult this may be. There is a relation also between this and the ever more virulent efforts of the islamist terrorism to internationalize the war through the dreadful strategy of taking hostages. We must answer to the challenge, and the Italian government could concretely work in that direction, with the responsible help of the parliamentary opposition.

Thankfully,

Marta Dassù, editor of Aspenia

Giuliano Ferrara, editor of Il Foglio

Piero Ostellino, Il Corriere della Sera

Vittorio Emanuele Parsi, professor of International Relations at the Università Cattolica di Milano

Here follows the statements of some leading Italian political figures in response to the appeal published by Il Foglio:

Marco Minniti, member of the DS Party
According to Minniti, who agrees with the proposal, the deployment of Nato troops in Iraq is “the only way to give a more active role to the UN and to establish a more multilateralist presence in Iraq. Nato is the only multilateral organization with the ability to hold together United States and Europe; the only one which has the operational know how to deal with an extremely complex situation such as the one in Iraq; and the only one which has the trust of the United Nations and would obtain the trust of the Iraqi government.” Minniti believes that “a step forward is needed on the part of those European countries which have opposed the war, and a step backward on the part of the United States, since Nato's very structure implies a turnover of its leadership.”

Sandro Bondi, Forza Italia
Sandro Bondi considers “not only desirable but actually possible and necessary a direct commitment of Nato in an operation of peace enforcing, within the framework and in the spirit of the last resolution of the United Nations. I believe that Italy, strengthened by the unity against terrorism reasserted by all the political forces, should put on this opportunity all the international prestige she has gained in the last few years.”

Gianni Alemanno, Alleanza Nazionale, minister of agriculture
For Gianni Alemanno, “The deployement of Nato forces would give a reference point to all Europeans, so as to guarantee the civil rights of the Iraqi people regardless of any possible political influence.”

Umberto Ranieri, vice president of the Foreign Commission of the Italian Chamber
Ranieri hopes that “the proposal will be supported with the necessary political and diplomatic efforts by the Italian government. I think that the center-left parties could accept a Nato intervention in Iraq as a means to guarantee a level of security necessary to have free elections. A more active responsibility of the international community in Iraq is the precondition for the progress of the stabilization process. Even the operational effectiveness of the United Nations in Iraq could be provided by the presence of Nato military contingents.”