Matteo Renzi tends to be equivicino (equally close to), to put it in the words of Giulio Andreotti — who is perhaps the politician to whom Italy's prime minister with a Christian Democrat past would mostly like to resemble when it comes to foreign policy strategies. That implies having far-reaching and ambitious programs.

To be fair, "star Giulio's" world was matter-of-factly easier to weather through than the one Renzi is confronting. The risk of getting burned by real wars (rather than the old cold ones...) playing out on a border near you, by the terrorist nightmare, and by diverging national interests often difficult to defend when not all depends on Rome, but rather on your going under Brussels' gauntlet, is now higher. Florence's former mayor debuted on the international stage with a sort of defiant stand, quite different from Mario Monti's or Enrico Letta's stealthy methods, and from Silvio Berlusconi's rebellious irreverence.

Over time he fine-tuned his tone not giving up, however, on a leadership which "is positive" for Italy, according to Ambassador Ferdinando Nelli Fierce, former permanent representative to the European Union for Italy and current chair of the Institute of International Affairs. The fact that Italian foreign policy relies now largely on the executive power, and that the Foreign Ministry was ousted on some dossiers is indeed a global trend, in an era of extreme personalization of politics (the French call it "pipolization").

[[ge:rep-locali:espresso:285225353]]

The global report card for Renzi's government Whether it is about cheering up Azzurri athletes at the Rio Olympics with texts that are potentially distracting just before a race, or about discussing austerity or flexibility in the economy with Angela Merkel, Matteo is always there. He sometimes scores a success, some other times he falters close to the finish line, some others he calculatedly relinquishes competition when taking sides is too complicated. He brings home mixed results — wins, losses and matchups — like contenders who are not Superman in real life.

The scale against which Renzi is evaluated is recognized beyond the nation's borders. There Italy's prime minister is seen differently than at home, where his star is declining in the popular perception, and where he lost the magic touch of the mythical 41 percent. In a more objective realism outside the borders, where the rumblings of a "deep Italy" that has been tightening the belt for at least nine long years now are not priced in, he finds sounder footing. Nine years, that is two more than the biblical famines.

Europe
The focus of deep Italy is the economy, still the priority of Italians along with security. That brings Brussels into play. Many bondholders of ailing or failed banks hoped for a total revision of the bail-in rule, state aid and fully recovering the savings lost. But we surrendered a share of our sovereignty, and this means that we don't have a currency, and that our public debt weighs like the boulder of Sisyphus. When we participate in summits, we are still seen as tiny Italy, a growth laggard. And there she comes, the teacher from Berlin, waving her proverbial magic wand.

Renzi's bold attitude at his debut, still remembered in Belgium, didn't help him much, because power relations need to be measured up after all, as the Roman history of the Horatii and Curiatii teaches. Since he corrected his approach, there have been some openings in the direction of out-of-fashion terms such as flexibility, growth and development, which did a come-back in the European Union. Still not enough so, of course.

It shows however, that the tide turned — "the agenda has been changed," to use the lingo of a long-time Old Continent diplomat. Along that line, and sure not what the many Salvinis would like to hear, "the piety shown with the rescue at sea of so many ??refugees is granting us a good degree of credibility," said expert ambassador Giuseppe Cassini.

Such credibility didn't convert into currency yet: our partners still must show that they are good as their word when it comes to equally distributing arriving migrants. The much trumpeted "European solidarity" went unheeded, and the explicit invitation to the Southern countries on the frontline sounded rather like a rude "sort it out yourselves." It is obvious that on the momentous issue of these biblical migrations Europe will rise or die. In this case our "values" overlap exactly with our national interest. And the motto "Italians are fine people" lives on.

Since every event is either an opportunity or a limit, for our Prime Minister Brexit could potentially be a fresh invigorating springboard. The lackluster Franco-German axis always needed a third party — which was London — to resolve disputes. That role could pass over to Rome, the last to be invited to the balls not to be missed. The jury is still out on this one. We'll see if Italy will jump on the bandwagon right from the first Renzi-Merkel-Hollande summit to be held in symbolic Ventotene on August 22.

Wars
Matteo Renzi shuns them: wars are the most immediate reason for losing support. How could anyone ever back a war? Sometimes wars are necessary, however, but involvement has to be decided on a case-by-case basis, assessing whether an armed intervention can reduce or increase damage. Lulled by the illusion of perpetual peace, we tend by instinct to choose to avoid wars. As long as they don't spread to near you. When taken by the scruff of the neck by coalition obligations, we take refuge in subtle distinctions. We allow the use of military bases and grant overflying our airspace, but we do not bomb. Our planes take off but only for supply missions. No boots on the ground, but trainers for taxi-armies that will do the job on our behalf. We send special teams to perform best-not-explained missions, that is, secret ones, huh. We call it a necessary hypocrisy. Pure Andreotti style in this case, yes.

This is panning out in Libya, where the colonial legacy on the one hand, and oil giant Eni's needs on the other, narrowed the path for diplomacy. We are shown appreciation in Iraq where our carabinieri train the local police, and our military train the Kurdish Peshmerga looking forward to the much hoped thrust on Mosul to eradicate the Islamic State. We are less generous in Syria, which produces the so many refugees who then flock to our shores. Among the Syrian fleeing many are educated, professionals or middle class. It comes to no surprise that Merkel is accepting them with a rational that combines humanitarianism and utilitarianism. The wide Mediterranean is "mare nostrum" now more than ever. It is hard to understand why we keep foot in Afghanistan, among the last, carrying out a mission in remote Herat under Shiite and thus Iranian influence, drained by now of any practical significance — if not to please Barack Obama and make good for our "no" on Libya.

No mystery on why we kept foot for the last ten years (since Massimo D'Alema's time at the Foreign Ministry) in Lebanon, the true masterpiece of our foreign policy: the conflict with Israel, which cooled off, albeit not resolved. True: Hezbollah have since stocked up its arsenals before our very eyes — this shouldn't have happened — but they are not using them. In general, and for some time now, soldiers have been our best ambassadors. Our soldiers are sought after in every corner of the planet. So much that the Army could lack troops with the regular turnovers. This is where Renzi has to take into account a too short of a blanket to cover all budget needs. We spend on defense 0.8 percent of GDP, according to figures by the former Chief of Staff Vincenzo Camporini. We top the 1 percent threshold after adding the funds contributed by the Ministry for Economic Development. But NATO requests its Member States to allocate at least twice that share. Moreover, the many open fronts, some of which domestic, in an increasingly disorderly world, would require that we revise upwards our efforts.

Dictators and the like
Matteo Renzi will have to learn to live with the fact that he will always be criticized for having been the first to get to Cairo to legitimize the liberticidal government of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. And not only that. He was weak when the shortcomings of al-Sisi's regime in the murder of university researcher Giulio Regeni became apparent.

Eni's business is not an excuse in the Regeni case, that of an Italian citizen who was tortured to death, with on top the mockery of lies and the false leads about the investigation, and the teasing of who was once considered a "friend". Egypt has an equal if not larger interest than Italy in exploiting the oil fields off its coast. It needs Italian technology. To negotiate at least on a level playing field should be the goal of any nation aiming at being respected.

The fact that the military in Cairo are the only ones capable of guaranteeing the Camp David agreements, and therefore (partially) Israel's security can neither be an excuse. The Jewish State is another thorn in the side of Italy's diplomacy.

We went from a substantial pro-Arabic stance in the years of Andreotti (yes, that's him again) to uncritically supporting all of Israel's needs, even now that its democracy shows signs of worrying decline. The turning point came with Berlusconi's governments. Renzi did nothing to correct the roll. Let's move on to the next arm of sea. Erdogan's rule in Turkey cannot be defined technically a dictatorship, because he was duly elected. However his counter coup, which is allowing the regime to drift towards the harshest measures, which could include death penalty, would have deserved a more unambiguous stand against the sultan and his neo-Ottoman policies. Renzi raised his voice only when Erdogan attacked some judges in Bologna for being "criminals" who had opened a probe against his son: too little too late.

Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa seems to be a fixation of the prime minister in Palazzo Chigi, who likes to quote his activism in the region as a highlight of his time in power. Too bad that so much effort does not meet as many results. Pursuing foreign policy with empty coffers can be difficult for anyone. It goes to Renzi's merit that he increased funding for cooperation for development, but he is still very far from the figures (see table) that supported Italy's intense lobbying in the '90s. At that time, Ambassador Francesco Paolo Fulci thwarted an attempt to reform the Security Council concocted against Italy thanks to the votes, read thanks, of Third world countries.

The UN
Our Prime Minister's most crushing defeat was at the UN, the result of a combination of improvisation and failure to assess the real power relations. The demand for a seat in the Security Council dated back to 2009, when power was in the hands of Mr. Berlusconi. At that time, it was quite unrealistic since we had occupied a seat 2007-2008. Italy took that extra step after Sweden and the Netherlands had already advanced their candidacies.

Still Giuseppe Cassini said half-jokingly: "We underestimated the Swedish gay lobby, which is strong in New York since the days when Dag Hammarskjöld was Secretary General." Stockholm got the seat with no effort, whereas with Amsterdam Italy brokered a (partly) face-saving compromise: one year each. We were sure it was in the bag. We could have stepped back, then we had to. All other chancelleries knew that that's how thing would pan out. Not Rome, where no one dared to explain to Renzi how the issue stood.

That's precisely what our Prime Minister could (also) use to build up a statesmanlike figure: someone willing to take steps beyond just pleasing him. Someone who will tell him how things truly stand.

traduzione di Guiomar Parada