Giuliano Amato’s interview on Ustica? Scandalous and liar. Here because. Margherita Boniver speaks
"Amato's interview on Ustica offends the Italian Armed Forces and NATO (at a time when our government and the vast majority of parliament are on Atlanticist positions and in favor of Ukrainian resistance), but also the work of a magistrate as scrupulous as Rosario Priore, who had reached different conclusions”. Conversation of Paola Sacchi with Margherita Boniver, president of the Craxi Foundation, former foreign affairs manager of the PSI, twice minister, undersecretary of the Farnesina with Silvio Berlusconi premier.
“Which prodest Giuliano Amato's interview with 'La Repubblica'? It will certainly put Italian-French diplomatic relations in serious embarrassment. Attack NATO. And this happens while the government is taking Atlanticist positions in favor of the Ukrainian resistance. Bringing up Bettino Craxi like this is a bad and malicious memory. Guess without evidence".
Talk to Startmag Margherita Boniver, president of the Craxi Foundation, former foreign affairs manager of the PSI, twice minister, undersecretary at the Farnesina with Silvio Berlusconi premier.
President Boniver, although Amato later specified that his are "deductions", it was an explosive interview. What's your opinion?
It's a scandalous and lying interview.
She's very strict.
The question that does not arise is 'cui prodest'?
In your opinion?
The interview raises many questions, first of all about the timing. Why decades after the Ustica massacre does Amato feel the need to remove boulders from his shoes?
That is to say?
That is, those responsible for the deaths of 81 innocent Italian citizens would have been the French. Secondly, there is an image of NATO intent on hitting the Libyan leader in a totally illegal way. And then there's that thesis about Craxi who allegedly informed Gaddafi and which instead doesn't hold up.
Craxi in 1980, the year of the Ustica massacre, was not yet prime minister. Bobo Craxi immediately tweeted: “It is already written in the history books that my father warned Gaddafi that they would bomb him. But it was 1986”.
Indeed, it is unthinkable that in 1980 Craxi, then secretary of the PSI, had confidential information of that level, to be able to inform the Libyan leader. Which, moreover, Bettino did not have and will never have met.
It is, in fact, known history that the rescue took place in 1986.
Exactly. In that period, Prime Minister Craxi, who had denied American bombers flying over Italian territory, had Gaddafi warned of the imminent bombing. At the time, the US considered Gaddafi "The public enemy number one".
Craxi an Atlanticist (Euromissiles in Comiso to give the best example), but a long view of the Mediterranean, as the facts have been proving him right for a long time, what arguments do you oppose to the USA?
Craxi argued his disagreement with such a violent action in the "backyard" of Italy, a Mediterranean nation, with its specific interests and development policies in the whole area of the "Mare nostrum".
This happens, precisely in 1986, after Ustica. Why does Amato bring up the socialist statesman like this?
It's a bad, malicious memory. In fact, Amato makes assumptions without proof.
How do you explain that Amato, always on excellent terms with France, made such a sensational exit?
My conclusion is that the interview with Amato offends the Italian Armed Forces, NATO (at a time when our government, the vast majority of the parliament are on Atlanticist positions and in favor of Ukrainian resistance), but also the work of a magistrate as scrupulous as Rosario Priore, who had reached different conclusions. What emerges is an image of Italy at the time made up of cheaters, misdirections and lies at all institutional levels.
What political logic then would there be?
I repeat: “cui prodest”? Certainly the interview with Amato will put Italian-French diplomatic relations in serious danger. And it will add new salt to the wounds of the recent debacle of the Farnesina on the Libyan scenario.
Could the left-wing opposition to Giorgia Meloni's government take advantage of this?
I guess so, given the political depth of a large part of the opposition who stick to unwelcome tweets or even banalities pronounced by Giambruno. Amato's statements today seem made on purpose to embarrass the Meloni executive. All that would be missing would be the request to withdraw our ambassador to Paris…
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/mondo/lintervista-di-giuliano-amato-su-ustica-scandalosa-e-bugiarda-ecco-perche-parla-margherita-boniver/ on Sat, 02 Sep 2023 21:00:54 +0000.