G20 and Dublin reform: Dragons from dreams of glory to rude awakening
Mario Draghi showed great uncertainty in framing the fall of Kabul. On 3 July he did not welcome the last flights from Herat with the general and the Folgore flag. On 17 August he placed Afghanistan in the "Arab world". Then, addressing the families of the 52 soldiers who died, he said: "their sacrifice was not in vain".
These last words of his have no meaning, if not to follow the official position of NATO, expressed by Secretary General Stoltenberg as follows: "in the last twenty years we have been able to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for international terrorism". A clue that must be combined with that other, his extreme prudence in expressing himself on the subject of the European army , which we have seen on the Atlantic .
In short, the first impression was that of an uncomfortable prime minister.
* * *
It must be compared with the frenetic Afghan activism, which has been shown by Draghi himself since that day. Apparently, he would have three goals.
(I) Complete the evacuations from Afghanistan – First of all, it is the Westerners left behind; how many are not known (indeed, it is not even known how many American citizens are left behind, as discussed by Punzi on the Atlantic ). We are also talking about collaborators , that is, the Afghans most directly employed by the already military occupation contingents.
The direct evacuation ended on August 31 and it seems the Carabinieri behaved very well. The 5,000 Italian collaborators rescued have received refugee status and will be relocated to Italy. But there remains the problem of those among them who have not been saved: particularly for Italy, which operated in Herat, very far from Kabul.
Biden refused to postpone the end of the evacuation, conceivably so as not to remain hostage to the victors and have his hands free to devote himself to preventing a stabilization of that country to his own detriment. Much to the disgrace of the Europeans who, evidently, have different intentions.
France is particularly active, which has proposed a safe zone at Kabul airport, managed by the UN, Turkey and Qatar. Turkey and Qatar would help evacuate those who still have to flee Afghanistan, in exchange by asking the G7 not to bomb or sanction the Taliban. The next day, Turkey and Qatar took part in a meeting with the G7 foreign ministers, called by the US. The safe zone was rejected by Beijing. All he has conceded is the general invitation of the UN resolution that the Taliban let anyone who wants to leave the country. China is today defined by the Taliban as "our main partner " and, evidently, did not want to give its competitors an advantage in controlling the new Afghanistan.
Paris has relaunched, with the proposal of an airlift entrusted to Qatar, or of "a joint post in Kabul to bring more people to safety". But now he will also have to make do with the Taliban who, in exchange, may not be content with hosting a possible EU consular office , but rather demand that official recognition that no one is willing to give.
As for Draghi, since 24 August he had warned Salvini that "the government will fight for humanitarian corridors : they represent a priority and Italy will have to speak with one voice". Except then realizing that "we cannot create humanitarian corridors from Afghanistan because we should give the lists of people to the Taliban" (Di Maio) and "if we want to build humanitarian corridors, we need the consent of the new government in Kabul, we in Afghanistan we are no more ”(Sassoli).
(II) An EU refugee policy – As for the EU, all member countries agree that those of them who had contingents in Afghanistan manage their own collaborators . But I totally disagree on the possibility of welcoming other categories of Afghans. The key word is relocation : relocation, to other EU member countries, of Afghans on the run, who will arrive in Sicily or Puglia.
Paris and Rome (with the support of Luxembourg and a few others) hit the key of human rights ( women's rights for example, which, for some, would have justified a continuation of that military occupation that even Niall Ferguson defines today " colonial mission "). Draghi himself, on 17 August on Tg1 , was bold: “Will Europe be up to it? yes, it will be ”, with specific reference to the reception, not only of collaborators , but also“ of all those who have exposed themselves in recent years for the defense of fundamental freedoms, civil rights, women's rights ”. Thus allowing the corifei ( Sassoli , Bonino , Buccini , Minniti ) to explain that any Afghan fleeing (and not just the collaborators ) ipso facto "has relied on the West" and, therefore, must be welcomed as a refugee . In potentially very, very large numbers, albeit indefinable. It will depend on whether the Taliban will follow through on their promises today: regarding stabilization (they explain that "thanks to the withdrawal of the Americans" the security problem is solved) and the employment policy (they add that women can be "very good and valid nurses … work in ministries, in the police force or, for example, in the judiciary as assistants … brilliant students "). We'll see.
The ultimate intention of Paris and Rome can only be the same: the reform of the Dublin Regulation (ie the principle of the country of first landing, according to which all Afghans fleeing who arrive in Italy will remain in Italy); perhaps by announcing the number of Afghans that each Member State would be willing to accept, perhaps through a directive on temporary protection that was never enforced.
Sadly , Germany opposes and has pulled behind the usual queue of satellites (this time in unison both those of the west and those of the east) and their commissioners. Clear demonstration of the always preponderant German strength, even under elections and the change of chancellor. As an alternative, the border countries (Greece, Lithuania, Poland) erect new walls at the borders, in imitation of what Orban did in 2015. While Berlin is already organizing agreements similar to the one stipulated at the time for Syrian refugees with Turkey : this time with Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Kirgisistan and, why not, Iran. Last time the EU had ratified and refinanced, it is not clear why it should not do so again. Yes, there is a commitment to discuss the Franco-Italian proposal again… maybe another two centuries.
This German opposition appeared to Mattarella, in an address on 29 August in Ventotene, "disconcerting" and "singular". Disconcerting , as he is convinced that migrations are unstoppable and that anyone who flees should be welcomed, not only because of persecution but also because of hunger or so-called climate change. Singular , as (according to him) in contrast with the creation of the NextGenerationEU and the SURE , instruments (always according to him) "not one-off … instruments that will remain" and (on Saturday he added ) will find their place in a new Treaty "which will have to replace that of Lisbon ". And to disbelieve it are only the "icy antipathyants" (apparently preferring the warm deluded ones), guilty of not understanding "Jean Monnet's statement that Europe will be built in crises".
Unfortunately, the EU not only does not listen to him, but even denies certain promises made to Draghi just last June. The latter had boasted of having obtained "significant, massive involvement of the EU" in North Africa and had also been a bully: "migration will remain on the agenda of the European Council, whatever today's proposal … because there will be major events which will require discussion in the European Council; therefore, I wouldn't have too many problems ”. Minister Lamorgese (according to Draghi "works very well") invoked compliance with the promises received ("the new emergency does not drive out the old emergency") and returned with the usual handful of flies in hand.
(III) The extraordinary G20 – Draghi would very much like to organize, in presence in Rome, an extraordinary G20 of the heads of state and government on the Afghan crisis. Extraordinary , as the regular G20 has an economic agenda and it is not clear whether he wants to anticipate it in full , by putting Afghanistan on the agenda, or calling a different and specific meeting. Perhaps Draghi would be satisfied with a dedicated videoconference. But to tell each other what?
Throughout August, the newspapers were able to freewheel: those who assumed the call-up in mid-September , those who fantasized that "the Afghan game and the involvement of Turkey and Russia could be an opportunity to free Tripoli and its surroundings from the troops of Ankara and Moscow ”, who dreamed of playing between the US and China. Among the corifei intent on praising him, Mario Giro stand out ("a success could increase our influence, marking a new beginning in the Central Asian region"), Claudia Fusani ("Mario Draghi weaves his web as king maker of international politics … it gives Italy an unprecedented and, until now, never achieved global protagonism "), Ugo Magri (" knows geopolitics ").
The self-promotional nature of the attempted summit is made evident by the main content proposed: “to commit ourselves to the utmost in a humanitarian direction ”. With Di Maio bringing with him the high commissioner for refugees, Filippo Grandi, to preach to hundreds of thousands of Afghans fleeing to Europe.
Sadly , Washington sees no advantage either in organizing a mass exodus from Kabul, or in putting anyone between itself and the Chinese. On Friday, Defense Minister Lorenzo Guerini , visiting US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, said "I believe that the G20 can be a useful tool" … me , not Austin.
Poor Mario seemed to have taken a step forward by meeting the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. But Moscow immediately demanded the presence of all states bordering Afghanistan: including Iran, which further stiffened Washington. He has increased the dose at the UN: not only does he want the US and the IMF to release all the funds currently blocked in Kabul, but also reiterates that he wants Iran to be present. Worse still for Draghi, the venue would not be the G20, but an international conference (even La Stampa acknowledges that it "would sanction the end of the Italian initiative to convene an extraordinary G20 in September"). In summary, the conference would be made up of Russia, the United States, China and Pakistan only. The Taliban government comments: "Russia continues to mediate for us and with us ".
Up to now, Beijing has not even deigned to answer the phone: to Draghi, who has been looking for him since at least mid-August, Xi Jinping will only answer today, 7 September . The first has already shown that he has no levers of pressure against the second: witness the sharp No that the latter made to pronounce at the G20 of the ministers of energy and the environment, in Naples on 23 July.
It is no coincidence that Draghi has let his difficulties leak through Minister Di Maio ("there is no unanimous position on the convening of the extraordinary G20 on Afghanistan") and some newspapers ("G20 in October "). He himself, on Thursday at the press conference , omitted the decisive extraordinary adjective while sighing: "as far as the G20 is concerned, I still think it will be done". Translation: the G20 of Heads of State and Government will, of course, obviously happen, but the regular one, in October and with a regular economic agenda. We will see today if he has managed to earn at least a sop.
* * *
In short, the frenetic Afghan activism shown by Draghi could lead to very little. What would also have suggested the first impression, which we have described: that of an uncomfortable prime minister.
The post G20 and Dublin reform: Dragons from dreams of glory to rude awakening appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL http://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/g20-e-riforma-di-dublino-draghi-dai-sogni-di-gloria-al-brusco-risveglio/ on Tue, 07 Sep 2021 03:51:00 +0000.