header i-Italy

Articles by: Marina Melchionda

  • "Primo Levi a New York". Il punto di vista di Andrea Fiano

    Il simposio si è chiuso con la proiezione di un documentario dal titolo “Primo Levi: un testimone scomodo”. Cosa ricorda in particolare?

    Più che un momento preciso, ricordo le sensazioni che mi ha trasmesso. Il filmato raccoglieva spezzoni di interviste che, seppur registrate in diversi momenti della vita di Levi, avevano una caratteristica in comune: ne mostravano il suo lato umano. Vede, noi siamo abituati a pensare a lui come a un sopravvissuto, uno scrittore e, a volte, un chimico.  Ma dove è il Primo Levi “uomo”? Dove è la persona con i nostri stessi problemi, entusiasmi…le nostre paure ed emozioni? Era lì, in quel documentario. Era nelle sue parole, nei sorrisi. Nelle esperienze di ogni giorno che amava riportare alla famiglia, agli amici. Il documentario adombra l’icona, mette in risalto la persona. È quantomeno singolare.

    Nel dibattito che è seguito – di cui lei è stato uno dei protagonisti – si è dato maggiore spazio al Primo Levi “scrittore”. Scrittore e, soprattutto, testimone dell’Olocausto. Come ha contribuito Levi, secondo la sua opinione, a preservare la memoria storica dello sterminio ebraico?

    La letteratura in Levi diventa strumento essenziale per la conservazione della memoria storica. Questo momento chiave del ‘900 rischiava di essere dimenticato, per volere o - secondo alcuni - per necessità. Si pensi che nei primi quindici anni dalla fine della guerra non vi era stata alcuna pubblicazione in merito.

    Levi scrive "Se questo è un uomo” di getto, poco dopo essere stato liberato. Lo ritiene un “dovere”: crede necessario rammentare alla gente l’accaduto, prima che il tempo “sbiadisca” nella sua memoria i ricordi delle esperienze vissute. In questo caso, possiamo dire, agisce da testimone sopravvissuto molto più che da scrittore. Ma nessuno accetta di pubblicare il suo libro. Infatti sembra necessario un periodo di “distacco” tra il momento storico e la produzione letteraria.

    E poi?

    Dagli anni ’60 in poi tutto cambia. “Se questo è un uomo” e poi “La Tregua” vengono finalmente letti dal grande pubblico. La letteratura sull’Olocausto diventa presto molto ricca: libri come “Il Diario di Anna Frank” vengono finalmente liberati dalla “censura” a cui erano stati posti e pubblicati.

    Come si posiziona Levi in questo nuovo contesto?

    Dagli anni ’70 in poi egli abbandona parzialmente i panni del testimone, del sopravvissuto. Si cala, invece, nelle vesti dello scrittore. È in quel periodo che pubblica “I sommersi ed i salvati”, un’opera che ritengo sarebbe stato impensabile scrivere prima.  È una vera e propria analisi del meccanismo, della filosofia, della razionalità – se così può definirsi –  che ha dato vita al “sistema” dello sterminio ebraico.  Non è un’opera descrittiva ma piuttosto una traduzione, una spoliazione degli eventi volta alla comprensione dell’accaduto.

    Ultima domanda: la produzione letteraria sull’Olocausto ha un futuro?

    Ritengo di si, anche se nella sua fattispecie cambierà moltissimo. Ormai la maggior parte dei sopravvissuti è deceduta e di conseguenza sarà difficile ottenere nuove testimonianze. Non possiamo sicuramente aspettarci la pubblicazione di nuove opere documentaristiche.

    D’altra parte, però, la produzione accademica che lo riguarda è certamente consistente. Anche i figli e i discendenti dei sopravvissuti, poi, si dimostrano attenti a preservare la memoria storica sull’Olocausto. Tra tutti ne ricordo uno in particolare, Daniel Mendelsohn. Il suo libro, “The Lost: A Search for Six of Six Million", è una sorta di diario in cui racconta del suo giro intorno al mondo per ritrovare tracce della sua famiglia e scoprire la sorte di alcuni dei suoi parenti imprigionati nei campi.

    Come per molti, l’Olocausto è certamente ancora parte della vita di questo scrittore.

  • Facts & Stories

    Curtain falls on "Voices on Primo Levi"


    The final session of the “Voices on Primo Levi” conference proved to be as interesting as the two sessions that preceded it. There was a consistent flow of people and a diverse audience at the Primo Levi Center.



    The final evening of the conference was divided into two sessions. The first session began at 6:30 p.m., when the public was invited to watch “Primo Levi: An Inconvenient Witness” (1997), a short documentary made for “Tempo”, produced by the Italian National Broadcasting company.



    The documentary consisted of an interview with Levi, a famous Jewish writer and chemist, and revealed new aspects of his personality.



    Levi was shown as a man of our times with issues, commitments, and doubts that are common to every human being.



    His life did not end at Auschwitz. He went on to have a nice family, a child for whom he made toys, and a career as a chemist where he discovered the allure of new technologies.



    During the interview, Levi did not hide his emotions when he recalled the moment when he bought his first computer and began to use it.



    Those present in the audience seemed to be touched by his clear and often ironic testimony, which showed that, despite his sufferings in the Holocaust, he could still feel emotions. He did not die in the concentration camp. Yes, he was still a man.



    Primo Levi was a man who left us with his passionate works that, from our point of view, are already considered classics.



    The historic and political relevance of these works is still uncertain; this was one of the issues during the second session of the conference, “The Politics of Memory”.



    The debate over Levi’s works was introduced by Natalia Indrimi, the center’s director. A panel of four prominent speakers discussed the topic: Mark Grief (American Prospect, London Review of Books), Robert Weil (W.W. Norton and co-editor of the forthcoming complete works of Primo Levi), Andrea Fiano (CPL), and Alessandro Cassin.



    Topics discussed included the relationship between history and literature in the Holocaust experience, the real political and social message Levi wanted to spread through his works, and the boundary between politics, history, and literature in his works.



    The participants discussed these topics from different and sometimes personal perspectives. They concluded that the significance of these works is not found in their remembrance of the past but through their contribution toward preventing similar catastrophes in the future.



    Because history can only teach people who are determined to remember their past.

     

     

     

  • Art & Culture

    Primo Levi. If This is (Only) a Narrator

    Many attended the first two sessions of the “Voices on Primo Levi” symposium organized by “The Centro Primo Levi” of New York.  

    The audience was varied: university professors, experts in the field, representatives of the religious and civil local communities - whether Jewish or not -  all set side by side to assist to some of the most original analyses on the figure of Primo Levi and his works. 
     

    The first session, on the 9th of September, was hosted by the Casa Italiana Zerilli Marimò.  
    At 7pm the PhD candidate Franco Baldasso and Uri Cohen, assistant professor of Modern Hebrew Literature, have guided the audience in a journey through the writings of Holocaust survivor Primo Levi.
     

     What is the border between narration and witnessing in his works? Why do these contain elements of fiction, rather than totally stick to reality? 
    Moderated by the Director of the Centro Primo Levi of NY Natalia Indrimi, the conversation between the two young experts induced the spectators to understand that the “gray zone” in which Levi was stuck, right between poetry and prose, imagination and reality, should be considerate a necessary and non-renounceable element for the writer-witness to narrate his experience: an antidote to the psychological refuse to recount the days in Auschwitz.. 
     
     
    A second reading-key was then offered by Luigi Dei, professor of chemistry at the University of Florence, Italy.  
     

    The expert demonstrated to the audience that Levi’s survival to the camps was essentially due to his knowledge of chemistry. Quoting extracts from the writer’s masterpieces, Dei offered an original explanation on the reason why Levi survived: being a chemist, he had the “privilege” to work in the camps’ laboratories. After a number of experiments, he managed to produce cigarette-lighters considered to be worth a piece of bread. This extra-food ration, according to our speaker, allowed Levi to survive for an extra 40 days. Just enough to be freed by the Russians.  
     
    The day after, the second session. This time no interpretations, no debates. Just one voice, Moni Ovadia’s. The Italian actor read excerpts from masterpiece “The Drawned and Saved”,. There, in the Conference Room of the Italian Cultural Institute, many people stood in careful listening for not less than an hour and a half. A general commotion finally brought the Institute’s Director Renato Miracco to ask for a minute of silence for the victim of the Holocaust, of yesterday and of today.  
     
    Below, info on the last session planned for Monday, September 15.  
     
    Center for Jewish History
    15 West 16 Street, NYC
    7:00 pm
    Admission: $15, $10 for members of CPL, Casa Italiana Zerilli Marimò and
    Italian Cultural Institute.
    Tickets: 212-868-4444 www.smarttix.com
     

    Primo Levi, Historian and Public Figure.
    7:00 pm - Film premiere: “Primo Levi’s on Television” by Roberto Olla.
    Italian w/English subtitles. 
    7:30 - 8:30 pm - The politics of memory - A conversation with Marc Greif
    (American Prospect, London Review of Books), Robert Weil (W.W.Norton and
    co-editor of the upcoming complete works of Primo Levi), Sergio Parussa
    (Wesley College), Andrea Fiano (CPL). 

  • Facts & Stories

    "Don't Ask - I'll Tell!" Italian Homosexuals Fight for Their Rights in the Army and Police Corps

    Italian homosexual police officers and soldiers are beginning a battle already fought by many of their colleagues in Europe: they want to end the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that forbids the enrollment of people who openly manifest homosexual conduct.

    Under the current policy gays and lesbians must keep their sexual preferences a secret while on the force or in the military. The “macho culture”, according to them, has for too long deterred many enrolled homosexuals from coming out after seeing reprisals of various kinds against colleagues -- from ostracism to 'punitive' transfers.

    With this in mind, a group of activists has set up an association called Polis Aperta (Open Polis), whose statute will be drafted on September 26 in Bologna.

    ''We're coming out against creeping discrimination,'' said Nicola Cicchitti, the President of the association, while announcing the intention to organize a great number of events to bring the issue to the general public

    Although Polis Aperta  only counts 200 members, spread throughout the different branches of the Italian Army (among which the Carabinieri paramilitary corps, the finance guards and the traffic force), it is already pressing for an official recognition from the Ministry of Defense.

    In the meanwhile, it has received strong support by Arcigay (Italy's main lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender -LGBT - organization), which helped funding the association and is paying for the advertisement of its various events in Italy’s biggest selling newspaper, Il Corriere della Sera. One exponent of Arcigay has recently declared that ''The birth of Polis Aperta marks an important new landmark in the creation of an ever more visible LGBT community. The presence of gays and lesbians in the armed forces and police will help these institutions to address the homosexual issue in a new and positive way and lead to a significant improvement in the everyday lives of gay service people ''.

    The Mario Mieli Association, another gay rights group, also approves the constitution of Polis Aperta: ''This is a novelty...that will move Italy closer to the rest of Europe and break with the absurd macho taboos which still pervade the armed forces''.

    The association has actually taken the decision to openly fight for the cause when encouraged by other European groups, particularly Gaylespol of Spain, which hosted this year's annual get-together of 14 uniformed gay associations in Barcelona.

    Italy is among the few democratic countries left that still impose a ban on the enrollment of homosexuals: nowadays, of the 26 NATO member countries, only 6 still apply this kind of discrimination. France, Germany and Spain already allow lesbians, gays, and bisexuals to serve. Italy is in countertrend, together with the United States of America.

    But the prospects seem different in the two countries: while Italy could pretty soon be obliged to conform its legislation to the standards adopted within the European Union with respect to the protection of Human Rights, for the United States there appears to be no obligation of such a kind. 

    The Pentagon's New Policy Guidelines on Homosexuals in the Military, adopted after the promulgation of Pub. L. 103-160 in 1993, under Bill Clinton’s presidency, state that “Sexual orientation will not be a bar to service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. The military will discharge members who engage in homosexual conduct, which is defined as a homosexual act, a statement that the member is homosexual or bisexual, or a marriage or attempted marriage to someone of the same gender”. Thus in the U.S. the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy still forbids homosexuals to serve openly in the military, although 75% of Americans nowadays claim to be in favour of ending such discrimination, according to the Pew research Centre.

    The cause of the expulsion of more than 11,000 policemen and militaries since the time it was approved, these rules still receive the applause of the Republican Party and of its candidate McCain: “Let’s not tamper with them”, he said.

    It seems instead that they could be revised if the Democrats win: Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic Candidate from Illinois, might start to repeal the current policy right after his election, according to Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the gay advocacy group. Solmonese affirms to be seeing “a sea of  change” in the attitudes of the Democratic candidate.

  • Facts & Stories

    Venice's New Calatrava Bridge: an Everlasting Project, a Disputed Infrastructure


    The controversy regards not only the necessity of building this high-cost infrastructure but, more then anything else, its architectural stability.

     

    Named after its first designer, the Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava, the bridge has witnessed strong opposition to its building since 1996, when it was first planned. Fears that the canal banks couldn't provide sufficient stability were rumored since construction begun in the summer of 2007. Local authorities have since tried very hard to reassure public opinion.

     

     

    Opponents to the sctructure include former culture undersecretary and art critic Vittorio Sgarbi, has declared that it will irremediably ruin Venice’s skyline from Piazzale Roma.

    Another hot topic of discussion is the cost of the project, which has risen from 4 to 10 million euros, an amount which Mayor Cacciari’s staff however considers reasonable and appropriate for a 94-metre-long infrastructure linking Venice's railway station to Piazzale Roma, a fundamental public transportation terminal on the opposite side of the Grand Canal.

     

    Of divergent opinion is the main opposition party, Alleanza Nazionale, who not only maintains that the cost of the project will more than double due to current legal disputes with the construction company, but also insists that the infrastructure itself is unnecessary. Therefore it plans to use the inauguration ceremony, which will be attended by Italy's President  Giorgio Napolitano, to denounce the bridge as ''a monument to bad administration and a waste of Venice's money''.

     

    Therefore the inauguration of the fourth bridge on the Canal Grande (and the first new infrastructure in Venice in 70 years) will be probably saluted by a chorus of protests.

     

    Ironically, the only possibility of avoiding all this seems to be... no inauguration at all. Ths has been proposed by Venice’s public works chief, Mara Rumiz: ''To put an end to the exploitation and speculation, there will be no inauguration. I for one am not very interested in ceremonies and much more concerned with works coming to fruition effectively”

     

     

  • Life & People

    The Premier & the Singer



    Summer holidays seem to have reminded the Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of his old days as a singer on cruise-ships: after having reached the apices of his careers both as a businessman and as a politician, he appears to be strongly willing to show off his consistently-praised vocal talents.

    His intimate friend Mario Apicella, who has become famous singing in Neapolitan after a multi-year career as a car park attendant, has in fact talked him into recording a CD of love ballads, “There’s love”, to be in the stores by Christmas. ''We haven't mentioned a single political theme in the whole CD'', the famous singer claims. “They will all be love songs linked to the Neapolitan tradition. I was also thinking about throwing some jazz in to try to make the Naples sound a bit more modern,” he adds.

    He complains that Silvio should dedicate more time to developing his musical career and leave aside his duties as a politician, “The problem is that even when he’s on holiday in Sardinia he’s always working because he receives an average of 40-50 telephone calls a day”. The famous singer clearly shows his determination to put great effort towards the realization of this new project and is actually working on it in the Premier’s villa.

    With Apicella at the guitar and Berlusconi at the microphone, the essential requirements for a great success are all evident. After years of occasional private concerts organized for friends and family and having sold 45.000 copies of their first album together ''Meglio Una Canzone'' (“Better a song”) produced in 2003, the two seem closer-knit than ever.

  • Facts & Stories

    Fatti Maschi, Parole Femine....!!!


     A visit to Annapolis, the capital of the State of Maryland, can really lead you to one of the most unexpected discoveries you could imagine making while touring the United States. In the land of modernity, modernism, democracy and equal opportunities you’ll happen to find out that the motto of one of the founding States of the nation is not only written in Italian but it is also a demonstration of deep chauvinism.

     

    In the picture attached – taken by the person who is writing a few months ago – you can read the following words “Fatti maschi, parole femine”, which literally means “Manly deeds, womanly words”. When I first read this phrase I thought that this certainly had to bother all the women passing by Annapolis or reading whatever document they get from the State government (which of course has this symbol printed on its top)!  So I wondered what could be done about it. Changing a motto is more or less like changing the flag of a country… people are used to it… so very little can be done… Unless you change the meaning of those words…of course! Actually this is what I asked myself when I read it at first… am I sure it means what I think it means? So this is what I found: I was right.

     

    Beginning way back to the 17th century (when the motto was first adopted) the phrase was translated in several ways, yes, but all had the same meaning. “Words are women; deeds are men”, “Manly deeds, womanly words”, “Deeds are manly, words are womanly” are some of the examples reported. Not even different words but different constructions are used to express what it appears to me resumes one single concept: women only talk, men do deeds. Of course my first reaction was to consider this phrase at least sexist. But why on earth has no woman in history ever complained? And then I got it: there is nothing to complain about. Fine, three centuries ago this phrase might have symbolized the prevalence of chauvinism in society. And maybe it still does. Every time it is mentioned (and I tested it, mainly in my Italian-American family) you can see men glowing all over the place. And women laugh. Why?

    Because this is the era of communication, and talking is the art of women. People (and peoples) now communicate more than any time in history. And knowing how to do it is fundamental. So let’s leave this symbol, let’s love this motto! Let’s consider it a compliment! 

     

     

  • Facts & Stories

    The Messina Bridge Odyssey


    Pietro Ciucci, the newly-elected president of A.N.A.S (the Italian road-building agency),  announced on May 23rd 2008 that the works for the building of the Messina Bridge, a  3,690-metre-long bridge designed to connect Sicily to the rest of the country, would recommence.  For one reason or another the project was never implemented, but it has always been a source of great debates in the Italian Parliament between those who are favourable to its implementation and others who contest its utility.


    The first to hypothesize the building of such an infrastructure was Charles the Great  who, in the IX century, expressed his desire to build a bridge over the two opposite sides of the Tyrrhenian Sea. Then, two centuries later, a number of explorations of the Strait had been organized under the auspices of Ruggero II – King of Sicily – in order to ascertain the feasibility of such a project. But no financings were given to its implementation; so it was quickly shelved.


    The project received new attention only in 1969 when A.N.A.S. organized an “International concourse of ideas” for the realization of a road and a railway that would connect Sicily to the rest of the Italian territory.  The creation of the Strait of Messina Joint Stock Company in 1981 finally showed the concrete intention of the Italian government to realize what was conceived as a fundamental infrastructure for the economic renaissance of Sicily.

    This perception is still felt today for a number of reasons: first of all, the building of the project is meant to be a source of employment for more than 13.000 people; second, the project is conceived to be a great booster of local tourism, since it would facilitate the access to the island for tourists coming from the mainland. The same thing is true for Sicilian workers whose workplace is situated outside of the region: they would benefit from an infrastructure able to handle 4,500 cars an hour and 200 trains a day, which would substitute the slow ferry services existing nowadays. Last, but not least, the bridge would transform the Tyrrhenian Sea into an important trade route for the transportation of goods from Africa and the Middle East to the European Union. This especially from 2010 on, when the countries of the Northern and the Southern side of the Mediterranean Sea will be all involved in a Free Trade Area as part of a project aiming to deepen the economic and social links between them (The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership).


    Berlusconi, the new Italian Premier, has always adhered to these considerations since he himself pushed for the realization of the Bridge starting in his first mandate in 1994. During his first short-lasting government (he was in charge until 1996) and during the legislature he held from 2001 until 2006, the Left wing of Parliament has always opposed - the building of the Bridge.


    Based on a number of studies performed by several Italian environmental NGOs, the Opposition stated that the Bridge would actually damage the region’s tourism sector, since its impact on the marine flora and fauna would be devastating. Moreover, concerns on a possible Mafia involvement in the implementation of the project were accompanied by another deep contestation: since its cost would be superior to 6.5 billion euro, they insisted that this sum could  be better used to develop the industrial sector, giving Sicilian people greater job opportunities then they would have through the bridge’s construction since, once completed, 13.000 people employed for this purpose would be left without a job.


    During Berlusconi’s mandates the total expenditures needed for studies and research concerning the Bridge  reached a value of 600 million euro (if summed with the money previously spent). The end of his mandate in 2006 brought Prodi’s coalition to power.  The then  transportation minister Alessandro Bianchi, rejected the multi-billion-euro project, calling it ''the most useless and damaging project in Italy in the last 100 years''.


    Berlusconi’s re-election seems to finally give him the chance to implement the project: Pietro Ciucci has stated that thanks to the Prime Minister’s determination and the financings devolved by the government, the construction of the Bridge could be over by 2016. If the centre-right coalition held by Berlusconi manages to stay in power until the deadline in 2013, no protests by the opposition or part of the civil society would be, at this point, able to stop construction and prohibit the completion of the biggest infrastructure Italy has financed in the last century.

     

     

  • Op-Eds

    Opinions on the Italian elections


     

    Political elections in Italy: some confirmations…but many surprising results
     
    If somebody asked me what I did yesterday, I would say: “I watched television”. And I think this might have been the answer 90% of Italians would have given. At 3 p.m. the official count of votes started in the polling stations and, no matter what button of your remote control you pressed, all you could watch on television were journalists and commentators expressing their own predictions on the results of the political elections. And, as many Italians did, I listened to what they had to say trying to formulate my own opinion on the issue.
    The upgrades provided by the Ministry of the Interiors contradicted some of the most common expectations.
    First of all, the voting participation was much higher then most of us would have thought: although a 4% decline in voters was registered compared to the last political elections, the fact that 80.5% of registered voters went and voted shows that the appeals that many showmen have launched in the last few months for boycotting the elections as a sign of mistrust towards Italian politicians have failed. Italians did not forget that voting is both a right and a duty: going to the ballot boxes, they showed great civic responsibility.
    Most of the results did not surprise me. I was almost convinced Silvio Berlusconi would have become our new Prime Minister: he conducted an excellent electoral campaign promising a long series of tax reductions and remedies to shaky economy. Most of the votes he has gained come from the South of Italy, where unemployment and economic discomfort afflict a larger portion of the population.
    Moreover it did not surprise me that in Campania, the region where I live, Berlusconi’s coalition won the confidence of 50% of the electors: most of the representatives of local government here, linked to the defeated Partito Democratico guided by Veltroni, are considered to be responsible for the huge garbage crisis that has afflicted the whole region throughout the year. Plus, the presence of Alleanza Nazionale in Berlusconi’s coalition seems to reassure people that something will be done to provide greater security to citizens, since the party has always based its campaign on the struggle to fight criminality and illegal immigration.
    So, these were some of the results I could predict. On the other hand, some others did surprise me, and not in a positive way.
    First of all, the complete defeat of the Sinistra Arcobaleno (the Italian left coalition) – which did not gain a single seat in Parliament -  and the loss of the traditional great consensus enjoyed in Liguria by the centre – left, nowadays represented by the Partito Democratico, seems to show a deep loss of support towards the Italian Left parties, by which low-income classes do not feel to be supported and/or protected anymore. The absence of a charismatic leader – even though Veltroni has proven to be more popular than his precursor Prodi – and an electoral campaign lacking great promises for the poorest, has attracted traditional left electors towards Berlusconi’s much more amusing programs. The way the Partito Democratico will perform its new role as “opposition” in the new Parliament and its capacity to promote the reforms needed and asked by its electorate will be of fundamental importance in the optic of rebuilding confidence among Italian left-oriented voters.
    Well, the results of these elections didn’t leave me with only these thoughts. Something has really disturbed my feelings as an Italian: the Lega, the secessionist party, member of Berlusconi’s coalition, has gained 10% of the votes.
    The first thing that came to my mind is the phrase Massimo D’Azeglio, a former Italian politician, pronounced when Italy got re-unified: Others built the country, we have to create a nation.
    It is clear to everybody that the problems troubling the South - criminality, poverty, social disorders and unemployment -  are deepening the gap with the much richer and industrialized northern regions. What is not clear is what happened to the sense of nationality evocated by D’Azeglio more than a century ago. Is it true that our sense of fraternity and the traditional Italian vocation of helping each other as in a family is disappearing, frustrated by a new individualism and self-consciousness? It is true that international economic competition is pushing northern citizens to operate a kind of Darwinian selection trying to leave behind everything that might stop or challenge their progress and wealth, as the South might?
    As the results of the elections have been diffused only a day ago, we can not of course tell right away to what extent the Lega will be able to influence Berlusconi’s government. The fact that the new President intends to nominate Bossi, the Lega’s leader, as the new Ministry of Institutional Reforms, is not exactly encouraging.
    Nothing is left to do other than observe the course of events…and hope that the promises made in the electoral campaign to Southern Italy will be not forgotten in the name of a strong and stable coalition with a northern party.
     
     

Pages