Address by the President of the Republic, Sergio Mattarella, at the 18th Conference of Mesdames and Messieurs Ambassadors

(Courtesy translation)

Mister Deputy Prime Minister,

Mister Deputy President of the Chamber of Deputies,

Messieurs Ministers,

Mister Deputy Minister,

Madam and Mister Undersecretaries,

Mesdames and Messieurs Ambassadors,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

allow me to firstly begin by expressing the Republic’s appreciation to our diplomatic Service; to the women and men who, day after day, ensure our Country’s presence throughout the world.

Some commentators claim that ours are not easy times, even unsuitable for diplomacy and therefore, for all those who exercise it as a vocation and a profession.

They are wrong.

It is precisely in difficult times that diplomacy unfolds one of its most valuable characteristics: pursuing exit strategies and spaces of dialogue.

Indeed, who can we confide in to outline concrete negotiation strategies and possible alternatives, including in the most complex conditions possible, if not in the diplomatic function?

Moreover – and perhaps precisely for this reason – nobody imagines diplomats as a sort of mere messengers in the international scene, but we rather turn to them as experienced professionals, capable of elaborating solutions and alternatives on the basis of the decisions made by our free institutions.

The important goals achieved by the international community since the second half of the last century issue from the greatly effective commitment of inter-State cooperation, facilitated by multilateral institutions, starting with the UN, and by diplomatic practice.

Thanks to all this – we must not forget – today, in the world, we live longer, learn more, and create more innovation and wealth; we have seen entire continents relieved of conditions of great backwardness.

The unpredictable – and, in some way, surprising – international scenario causes disorientation.

The pessimism-induced anxiety that derives must not lead us to consider inescapable a process whereby the geopolitical order that we had contributed to building starts showing increasingly wide and deep cracks, and the conflicts that we had thought to be forever confined to history spark up again, sweeping across regions close to us.

The same applies to the looming of new hotbeds of instability in areas in which political and social fragility has now become structural and where paradigms emerge that give prevalence to personal interests, often defying international laws.

In the present context, it is possible to become key players by putting your stakes on two spheres: multilateral and supranational organizations such as the European Union, which can successfully achieve the critical mass necessary to avoid falling once again prey to unrealistic ambitions.

Our contemporary world is crossed by a multitude of overlapping and cross-fertilizing crises. In order to grasp this complexity, newly-coined expressions have been introduced such as “polycrisis”, which factor in political elements – fruit of knowing decisions of humankind – and apparently exogenous circumstances, such as climate or health care emergencies; they too – if better analysed – are the collateral effects of the same human activities.

Examples of this are self-evident.

The Russian aggression against Ukraine persists with a huge number of victims and terrible destruction and, despite the negotiation efforts underway, with the aberrant intent to violate the principle of refusing to redefine the balances and the confines of Europe through the use of force. This action was considered to be irresponsible and inadmissible already over fifty years ago at the Helsinki Conference on Cooperation and Security in Europe.

The tragedy in Gaza, with its burden of civilian suffering and the persistently high risk of escalating, continues to expose the Middle East to new lacerations: achieving a ceasefire, no matter how fragile, requires the firm support of the whole International Community.

In the Sahel and in the Horn of Africa, political instability and sectarian conflicts compound with environmental crises, extreme poverty and forced migration.

In the most sensitive areas of East Asia, competition between powers translates into an increase in friction and, sometimes, even in the intensification of a dangerous warmongering rhetoric.

Tensions are also growing in Latin America and in the Caribbean, which recently increased with the reaffirming or a sort of re-edition of the so-called “James Monroe Doctrine”, whose presidency ended exactly two centuries ago.

Everywhere in the world, the consequences of global phenomena ranging from climate change to economic inequalities and energy crises compound with the resurging of radicalisms and extremisms that sometimes make peaceful coexistence within and between States difficult.

This condition is fuelled by manipulative information flows that, in hybrid conflicts conducted with a variety of hostile instruments, overlap the internal and the external fronts.

Dangerous disinformation activities tend to corroborate the presumed vulnerability of the public opinions of democratic Countries.

Novel but obscure centres of power – actually outside the regulatory and jurisdictional scope of sovereign States and supranational organizations – are attempting to take root. These centres of power have a great capacity to influence citizens, and likewise, also policy decisions, both within single States and internationally.  

Diplomacy too is called forth, together with the other branches of the State, to concur in protecting the Republic’s system of freedom and democracy also in our Country.

On this front, a particularly relevant role is assigned to multilateral institutions and the European Union, the seat of shared values and the bulwark of the rights of its citizens.

This is a central issue.

The temptation to fragment is seeping into international relations – and even in the Western world – by weaponizing a hostile method that measures international relations through a zero-sum scheme: if somebody wins, it means that somebody else loses.

It is exactly the opposite of the scheme successfully applied during the decades in which international cooperation developed, when we could bet on progress and, all together, obtain positive results.

It seems peculiar – to say the least – that, while we see, at international level, initiatives aimed at uniting States and coordinating their aspirations and activities, we now witness a disarranged and unjustified aggression against the European Union, altering the truth and presenting it as an oppressive organization, just short of completely opposing liberty, instead as one of the most successful historic experiences for democracy and for the rights, which also developed with the support and appreciation of the whole Western world.

In the 20^th century, Europe touched the abyss of an international system that had lost the way of reason.

The wars of the 20^th century are not only a chapter in history and in its books: they warn us of the consequences of the prevalence of force over reason, of unlawfulness over lawfulness, of fear over far-sightedness. 

Today we are witnessing the pretence of imposing sanctions on judges of international Courts of Justice because of their function in preparing a case against crimes of war, in defence of human rights and ultimately in defence of all the people worldwide: such claims belong to a world dangerously looking backward to our very worst past. A world that is upside-down and contradictory, with members of international Courts remanded upon the petition of a Country that promoted the Nuremberg Trial, with its judges in the forefront.

Eighty years ago, the end of World War II and the founding of the United Nations marked a fundamental transition: the awareness that peace is not only the absence of conflict but a complex political, legal, and moral architecture that needs to be built day by day. And it requires the commitment – daily commitment – of States and, internally, of communities that nurture this prospect.

The “pursuit of peace in security” – as warned by an eminent tenant of this Palazzo, Aldo Moro – was founded not only on strategic calculations and power balances but also on the aspiration to breach economic and educational gaps, and cooperation and interdependence among peoples.

Peace in security is peace in justice.

The post-war period suggested the idea that the future could not be defined by the alternation of hegemonic cycles between powers – or aspiring powers – in order to escape the “Thucydides Trap” highlighted in the theory of international relations.

Ever since it was established, our Republic has manifested an acute awareness of the value of international dialogue as the preferential way of affirming its role in the world.

This decision not only originated from an inspiration contained in our Constitution but – now as then – reflects a targeted reasoning on the best way of safeguarding our national interests.

That Constitution materially and progressively took shape over time, starting with the action taken by a Foreign Minister like Alcide De Gasperi and later by Carlo Sforza, who worked with him and was in turn appointed Minister: it has guided our Country, with no discontinuity, through the international scenario, based on peace, dialogue, multilateralism, Europeanism, and our Atlantic bonds.     

These orientations still now continue to represent a valuable heritage capable of guiding us through the new forms taken by conflicts.

In the face of the new complexity, it so happens that also diplomacy appears to be falling back or is thought to merely manage the notarial certification of situations regulated by force.

This is not the case!

Some of the results achieved by diplomacy – both multilaterally and bilaterally - in the post-war period, were extraordinary.

Today, maybe more than in the recent past, it is essential to have a competent and well-trained diplomacy, capable of understanding and managing this complexity while moving in a balanced way.

A diplomacy capable of developing initiatives to fill the worrying lack of mutual confidence between States that is accumulating within the international Community; capable of addressing all the players in a crisis, affirming the inalienable principles of international law.

Paradoxically, the technological advancement of armaments and the use of artificial intelligence expose us to even greater risks.

In the most dangerous theatres, entrusting the decision of life and death to algorithms would mark a dramatic reversal in our collective security.

I think that the very fine divide between the illusion of the infallible dominion of artificial intelligence and the definitive prevalence of natural stupidity, unfortunately, as in the famous aphorism attributed to Albert Einstein, could tend to infinity.

The economic and commercial domain is far from being free of tensions, with the spread of policies and instruments aimed at artificially reinforcing one’s own Country to the detriment of others. Productive super-capacity, dumping, tariffs, dominion of supply chains and economic coercion – just to mention a few of the most significant distortions – do harm to a peaceful and interdependent world.

If we intend to pursue progress objectives, the only way is to strengthen cooperation.

The alternative leads to spiralling into a vortex of instability.

Our geographical position places us at the crossroads of sensitive areas, from the Mediterranean to Central Europe, from Africa to the Near East.

Our economy is bound to global flows: our society is open to the world; our political evolution has benefited from the construction of Europe, multilateral institutions and cooperation.

It is evident that an operation is underway and is directed against the West, which would like to distance democracies from their values, and separate the fate of different nations.

We cannot be distracted and we cannot afford to make errors.

Diplomacy is decisive for Italy’s projection to the external world, for its position in an integrated Europe and in the world, and not only to achieve these goals.

It is decisive because our Country has always been able to effectively manage the soft power with which it is endowed.

Is it still applicable, at a time in which a vision of international relations is taking root that some tend to base on brutality?

The transition period we are going through presents dangers that we must learn to recognize promptly: looming before us is the risk of a general backtracking of civilization.

International legality is a common good that is effective in combating this danger.

It is a well-known fact for those, like you, who work daily in contexts that are often difficult. And allow me, in this respect, to express my solidarity and closeness to all of those among you who work in zones of conflict, with disadvantages and risks that deserve utmost recognition by the State.

At a time of “polycrisis” a “poly-diplomacy” becomes essential.

I imagine that this pressing need to adjust aims to correspond to the Farnesina’s recent reform that – as Minister Tajani reminded us – aims to address the whole range of national interests, which are to be promoted with an integrated vision. 

Diplomacy’s quiet interweaving that increasingly connects States and Communities in these times of ours, can and I think should – through its loftiest expressions – contribute to promote concord in the coexistence of people, administer international justice on those who attack and oppress, and cooperation for the common good of all.

These are the founding principles of our Republic.

With this hope in mind, I wish you all a profitable working session, and my very best Season’s greetings to you and your families.