by Umberto De Giovannangeli

“The solution? The solution is cooperation. Especially in Africa. Our goal is called shared development: something that benefits everyone.” These are the words of Emanuela Del Re, Italy’s Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs with responsibility for International Cooperation. Her reflections clearly reveal her first-hand experience, made up not only of academic studies and teaching, but also of personal involvement in the field and in areas of conflict.

• "Among the people" the Deputy Minister explains, with pride and emotion, showing us photos with Syrian refugees or Yazid women who have fled from the hell of the Islamic State. In her office in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a poster of Nelson Mandela is proudly on display. "It was an electoral manifesto – says Del Re – I was young, and I followed that historic vote in South Africa as an international observer. And I 'conquered' that poster by climbing up a street light." Even now that she has become the number two of the Ministry based in the Farnesina building, when she speaks of Africa Emanuela Del Re balances feeling and reason, when she argues that "Africa is an opportunity, not a threat".

When people talk or write about Africa, their dominant feelings seem to be those of fear, insecurity, the "we must defend ourselves” syndrome. As a scholar as well as Deputy Minister, tell me: is Africa really only this, for us as Italians, for us as Europeans?

As a scholar and as someone who has now assumed responsibility for a sector – that of international cooperation – which I consider vital for the development of both our country and the beneficiary countries, I’ll answer by reinterpreting the vision expressed by that syndrome. Africa is a continent full of resources. And this is true from so from many viewpoints, not only because it is a strategic partner on all fronts, including those of security, naturally. We must remember the negative aspects and never underestimate them... illicit trafficking, terrorism, but also climatic conditions that often trigger major crises. But Africa is not only this. It is also and above all something else. It is a continent brimming with numerous important opportunities. Because Africa is a young continent, a continent of immense innovation and creativity. It is a continent where human resources constitute a massive asset, above all because in terms of its interests and values, Africa is orientated towards Europe. At this moment, undoubtedly, the prevalent aspect for us is immigration, which we know is always deeply painful. But in perspective – if we have the ability and the determination to create real, stable and lasting development goals, on the ground, in the countries of Origin – Africa can become a continent of vast changes and new economic, social and political opportunities.

Can I take you up on this last important and ambitious affirmation? Especially after months when so much has been said, written and argued about the phrase "Let's help them at home". From your point of view, what does "help them at home” mean?

It means creating the conditions, in a positive way, for shared development, which means defining new relations between donor countries and beneficiary countries. And on this subject, let me underline a fact that Italy should be proud of...

Namely?

In the field of cooperation, we are a giant. We are the fourth country in the G7 in terms of percentage between Official Development Assistance and Gross National Income (0.30%, achieved this year, some years earlier than expected).
Helping them at home means creating a two-way donor-beneficiary relationship instead of a one-way project. And that both both the donor – in this case Italy – and the beneficiary countries (not necessarily only African nations) can both benefit from this relationship. In other words, a project that truly corresponds to the needs of the beneficiary country and at the same time offers the donor country the possibility of developing an important, privileged relationship, of shared values, of collaborative growth that over time generates long-term structural solutions.
Until now, I would say that the concept of 'helping them at home' has been a bit tangled up with a vision of the past, i.e. that the donor operates in the beneficiary country with a vaguely charitable conception of aid. This idea must and can change, especially since our current beneficiaries – I’d like to emphasise this – possess extraordinary abilities. These are countries that can offer enormous resources, to the point where the very concept of a donor-recipient relationship becomes obsolete.

And is there no risk – as often feared by volunteers, NGOs or international agencies operating in the field – that we end up financing dictatorial regimes which have all kinds of goals in mind except that of benefitting their peoples? In even more direct and rather brutal terms: in Africa, does Italy look for partners in growth (and not only economic but also civil, political and democratic growth), or Gendarmes that police – no matter how – their external borders?

This is a complex question, which deserves a political answer, but it also requires certain technical clarifications, necessary to fully explain trends in certain international developments and equilibria. Italy has always moved on numerous fronts in Africa, with a commitment that’s there for all to see: we are among the largest donors, committed to projects in many countries, and in terms of quantity and quality we have one of the most important diplomatic networks. When Africa is discussed, the focus is usually on conflicts and negativity. But in that continent of opportunities and possible changes, many events point in an opposite direction, allowing the heart to open itself to hope...

Such as?

The peace agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea, a difficult process (as demonstrated by the recent violence in Addis) but which offers a sign of far-sighted vision). But remember, those two countries are home to two large Italian schools which train their future local middle class. This is an example, just to show that Italy has contributed on this front to help establish solid organisational and political foundations from within, through the invaluable intervention of our Cooperation Agency and many NGOs. Or alternatively by financing development projects that are rigidly certified, meticulously monitored at every step and following a structured path with tightly controlled results. We know all too well that highly problematic situations exist, but even in those cases, intervening with a positive vision and supporting social growth and development is still hugely important, even from a security point of view. Do we want to talk about Libya?

Never has a talking-point been so urgently updatable...

Libya is a very difficult country at the moment: a reality that has to be confronted from various perspectives. One of them, which is particularly dear to me and in which I deeply believe, is the result of the agreement signed last Friday in Brussels between the European Union and the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation. This is an agreement that involves Italy as a protagonist: the EU has allocated 50 million euros, of which 28 went to the management of the UNDP but 22 were delegated by the European Union to Italy. Italy is extremely proud of this, because with these 22 millions we can help 24 municipalities in Libya not only to rebuild their infrastructure, roads and bridges, but also the very fabric of society, because we can contribute to the reconstruction of local administrations and ensure that these urban civil societies are functional. From this point of view, I believe that this is one of the best possible opportunities for Italy to take part in the reconstruction of Libya, at a time when it is one of those countries that could tempt us to think about the need for a ‘gendarme'. But our response is quite different: we accompany, we take Libyan society by the hand and we try to bring it with us towards the future.

Looking at Libya and more generally at Africa, do you think that "business diplomacy" and human rights diplomacy can not only be reconciled, but also find a virtuous synthesis?

We are in a historical moment of great intellectual ferment and, I would add, unprecedented instant information on humanity’s problems, on all fronts and at all latitudes. This makes us believe that it’s true that the business world in the past often appeared to us as arid or as impeded by major obstacles, for example in the field of security. But it’s also true that we have a large number of companies that operate well even in difficult areas, such as Ethiopia, where we have a strong entrepreneurial presence. Add to this the fact that the business world is now more aware of its impact on local societies, so I believe that it can act as a fundamental channel for transmitting values. Including Italian values such as honest, respectful, ethically acceptable working conditions. Such conditions therefore become a reference for long-term sustainable development based on respect for human rights. In this scenario, even entrepreneurs and the business world becomes – when they are honest – a reference point for public values. The more we combine various fronts – such as that of politics, that of social development, of NGOs (which are fundamental) and therefore of civil society, plus of course the world of entrepreneurship – the more we will achieve important results, concrete results.

You have an important responsibility: that of the head of International Cooperation. How do you respond to people in the world of politics who claim that spending public money in this field is "a luxury that Italy cannot afford"?

I reply that the globalised world does not isolate us. Never. We are no longer islands, but we are extremely well-connected archipelagos. This means that whatever happens in this small part of the world where we live has enormous repercussions elsewhere, and vice versa. It also shows that cooperation – as implied by the term itself – is a way of working together for something. That something is part of our future, and consequently we must have a total and convinced awareness of how important it is to invest in third-world countries as well as our own, because the reflection of this investment on our world is absolutely positive... not in the sense of division, barriers or breaking up the globalised world, but in the sense of a convinced unity. Young people, in whom I think we should invest a lot, are now globalised, without borders.
If a globalised young person has had a profitable interaction – for example through cooperation – with countries that have already travelled the road of establishing regulations, constitutions, laws that have encouraged the affirmation of the individual (especially the weak individual) with all their rights, what happens? Wherever they come from, the globalised youth becomes a flag-bearer, an ambassador of progress and stability in the world, a social agent generating social remittances. This is also a commitment that must feature the whole of Europe as a protagonist, to revive its founding values, which are those of inclusion, respect for human rights and openness towards one another. We must spread the awareness of having an extraordinary opportunity to share problems and to face them together... not least for the good of our neighbours. It is important to continue to look to the East, but certainly the priority right now is to help a continent of such huge resources as Africa to grow and continue growing. A continent bonded deeply with the Mediterranean, and which for better or for worse shares its history with the major European countries. A continent which looks favourably on European values, in which it increasingly tends to recognise itself. This is an opportunity that we simply cannot afford to lose.

Africa is also hope. On a political level, what is the most important hope at the moment?

The one I mentioned before: the agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It’s the most wonderful news of the year... it fills us with joy. It’s also an extraordinary signal, transmitted especially by the young Ethiopian premier, Ably Ahmed Ali: the youngest African prime minister, a person who has had the intelligence – transcending ideologies or border problems – to believe in the propulsive element that grows from making peace. His enormous courage must be recognised and supported, as must Eritrea’s belief in the possibility of the peace process. A peace to which Europe and our country can contribute: in the 2017-2018 two-year period, Italy donated over 81 million euros for development and humanitarian projects in Ethiopia, Somalia and Eritrea, and its aid contributions to Eritrea amount to 47 million euros. These sums could grow, according to developments in the progress of the regional stabilisation process. An investment in the future. A future of peace and cooperation, featuring the young globalised generation as protagonists.

by Emanuele Bompan

• Can the Renaissance bring destruction? If it’s the name of a dam, it could do. Under construction since 2011, the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is considered the biggest dam ever built in Africa up to now. Project and financing are Ethiopian, implemented with Italian know-how... a giant costing 4.2 billion dollars producing 6.5 GW of power, harnessing the Nile to bring energy to millions of Ethiopians, above all in the capital, Addis Ababa. The project is welcomed by neighbouring Sudan, as the regulation of water flow will facilitate irrigation for agricultural projects in the Nile’s Sudanese section. “It will provide great support for Sudan’s agriculture", explains Osama Daoud Abdellatif, owner of Dal Group, a large agricultural company based in Khartoum.

But for Egypt the situation is critical. "No one can change our country’s water quota," declared Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi recently. “We support the development plans of our friends and brothers in Ethiopia, but we have to protect our national security, and water is a matter of national security. Full stop.” No space for discussion. A few weeks later, Egypt’s generals promptly presented their military plans should their country’s water management demands not be respected, as it initiated major diplomatic pressure on the states upstream. At the end of January, Sudan recalled its ambassadors from Egypt and warned Cairo to withdraw its threat of deploying troops on the eastern border of the country. In March, the tension was reduced a little, after a meeting of the three presidents of Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan in Khartoum, with a ague declaration of intentions regarding the search for a peaceful solution.

Egypt is in a delicate situation. «The country’s water supply was fragile long before the building of the Renaissance Dam», explains Michele Dunne, director of Middle Eastern research of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 85 percent of the water for Egypt’s agriculture comes from the Nile. An analysis of future climate scenarios reveals that even without the Renaissance Dam, Egypt’s water security could worsen substantially by 2025. So we can understand the Al-Sisi government’s concern about the uncertainty caused by the dam and the potential strategic and political weight it can assume in the event of an international escalation. Mohamed Abdel Aty, Egyptian minister for natural resources, fears that "a minimum reduction in the Nile's waters, even by just 2 percent, would mean our agriculture losing at least 83,000 hectares of fertile land." Ethiopia is playing down the situation by explaining that the dam will be used to produce electricity, not to draw off water.

A similar situation is happening along the Mekong River, which crosses six nations, and where thirty-nine dams are planned be built in the next fifteen years, some already at an advanced stage of construction. For months, Vietnam has been carrying out a diplomatic offense to make the other coastal states build the dams in a sustainable way, sharing a common strategy, which should be established by the Mekong River Commission, the body set up to study and manage the inter-national use of the river's water. However, the commission’s president, Pham Tuam Pham, admits that this body has a study and research mission, not a political one. According to Rémy Kinna, a Transboundary Water Law Global Consulting analyst, "to date, Vietnam is the only area state to have ratified the United Nations River Basin Convention, a global legal mechanism to facilitate management of cross-border rivers and lakes in a fair and sustainable manner”... a sign of low interest from other states, Laos and China especially. The Cambodian president Hun Sen, during the recent meeting of 4 April of the Mekong River Commission, tried to "calm the waters", announcing a new phase of more shared and more sustainable river management. But for the moment Vietnam, which fears a reduction in fishing and water volume in the delta, remains skeptical. "We need concrete action quickly - declared Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc - Mekong water resources are worsening in quality and quantity."

So, are we faced with a new series of water-related conflicts? 276 transnational lakes and basins in the world are today shared by two or more countries. This affects a total of 150 states, involving half the planet’s surface water, and 60% of its fresh water. In addition, roughly 40% of the world’s population lives near rivers and in drainage basins that belong to two or more countries, with two billion people sharing about 300 cross-border underground aquifer systems. From 1948 up to 2017, the United Nations recorded 37 political incidents that led to open conflicts related to water. In the same period, 295 multilateral international agreements on specific water management issues were signed, ensuring peace and collaboration.

Valid tools for diplomatic resource management exist. There are currently two: the UN Water Convention and its Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses. The Water Convention has a regulatory structure based on three pillars: the obligation not to damage other countries and to prevent, control and reduce the significance of cross-border problems; the principle of reasonable water use; and the principle of cooperation. To prevent, control and reduce the threat of possible divergences between neighbouring countries, the Convention calls for the use of "all appropriate measures", including the development of shared technology and infrastructures via appropriate bilateral and multilateral treaties between the countries involved. But will this be enough to stop the water-wars of the future and achieve a global blue peace?

by Umberto De Giovannangeli

• April 4th was the International Day for Mine Awareness and Assistance in Mine Action, once again marked by the demands of the civil society and the appeal of the Head of State. The Nobel Peace Prize Jody Williams stated to Oltremare: "A world without weapons is possible. Banning landmines, as well as investing in structures and rehabilitation programmes for the hundreds of thousands of people injured in the many conflicts where these armaments have been used, is not just a matter of justice or compensation for the harm done. It also means freeing resources to use in projects that improve the living conditions of people fleeing wars which are all-too-often fought using antipersonnel landmines." The US Nobel Prizewinner widens her perspective and - looking at today’s tragedies, from Syria to the "forgotten" war in Yemen - focuses on the challenge of disarmament: "It is a problem of national laws - she says - but also of the will to apply them on an international scale. It is a matter of political will."

A world without weapons of mass destruction is not a utopia, it’s a healthy and realistic principle. This is why it’s important to build a transnational movement that starts with public opinion and ends by influencing decision-making political centres. In the U.S.A., young high school students are now the protagonists of an extraordinary movement asking the Government for more rigid arms sales measures. Many young people challenging the power of the arms lobby, showing extraordinary determination plus a clarity of purpose that does not lend itself to manipulation of any kind." From a speech in Oltremare, by the American Jody Williams, Nobel Peace Prize winner in 1997 for her work for the international anti-mine campaign. This is the rationale that on April 4 backed the13th International Day for Mine Awareness and Assistance in Mine Action, also in support of the United Nations Mine Action campaign.

The US Nobel winner raises a crucial issue for today and for a future that is increasingly becoming the present: that of military spending. After 13 consecutive years of growth from 1999 to 2013, followed by several years of stabilised spending - according to the latest report by SIPRI, the Stockholm international peace research institute - in 2017 total military spending worldwide rose to $1.739 billion. A marginal increase of 1.1% in real terms compared to 2016. The United States comes top in the list of countries with the highest military spending: 610 billion dollars... more than a third of the world total. Washington has thus put an end to a period, starting from 2010, of decreasing military spending. China lies in second place, with spending rising for the last 29 years... in 2017 estimated at 228 billion, 5.6% more than in 2016. Saudi Arabia comes next: in 2017 it increased its defence budget by 9.2% compared to 2016, bringing it to 69 billion dollars and triggering an increase in arms expenditure across the Middle East, particularly in Iran (19%) and Iraq (22%). In 2017, military spending accounted for 2.2% of world GDP, or $230 per person. Disturbing data, which opens up nightmare scenarios. We don’t have to dream about a world with no armies, or to always demonise any use of military force. That's not the point: if we believe that the resolution of conflicts should not be entrusted solely to the use of force, and that we must intervene on the causes that feed those conflicts - which may be increasing inequality between the North and South of the world, or absolute poverty or the revival of old and new slaveries - then we must tackle the problem of cutting military spending on a global scale. This also means revitalising the anti-mine campaign, reinforcing it with new content.
This is the rationale that on April 4 backed the13th International Day for Mine Awareness and Assistance in Mine Action, also in support of the United Nations Mine Action campaign.

“An unprecedented volume of landmines and unexploded weapons menaces rural areas and urban war zones, mutilating and killing innocent civilians long after the end of the conflict. Roads cleared of explosive devices allow peacekeepers to patrol and protect civilians: when fields are demined and schools and hospitals are protected, normal life can start again. Mine Action is vital. I urge all governments to provide political and financial support to allow anti-mine action to continue, wherever it is needed. In our turbulent world, Mine Action is a concrete step towards peace." With this video message, the Secretary General of the United Nations António Guterres urged the governments of all countries not to abandon their commitment to Mine Action. "The issue of mines and unexploded ordnance is a problem with humanitarian, emergency and development dimensions - said Giuseppe Schiavello, national director of the Italian Campaign against Mines - Our country has been significantly engaged in this cooperation context for many years, and our civil society is highly sensitive to this theme. Italy has gone from having a sad record as a mine-producing country to acting in the vanguard of those working to alleviate the suffering caused by these devices - Schiavello continued - This is why we ask our legislators to activate tools like the 58/01 fund dedicated to Mine Action, and to urgently approve a law prohibiting financial investments in international companies involved in manufacturing arms now banned by our country.

“On this important date, the Italian Campaign against mines and the National Association of Civilian War Victims have asked the Presidents of the Chamber and the Senate, and the Parliamentarians of the 18th Legislature, to immediately work for a rapid and urgent approval, pursuant to Art.136 of the Senate regulations. The bill now numbered S n. 1 - titled "Measures to counteract the financing of companies producing anti-personnel mines, and cluster munitions and submunitions” - in the previous legislature, in the Senate, was numbered DDL S.57 (b). After its final approval (on 3 October 2017), it was returned to Parliament by the President of the Republic (on 27 October 2017), requesting a new resolution complying with Article 74 of the Italian Constitution. This provision, in fact, had already been definitively approved by both branches of Parliament during the previous legislature, but could not come into force due to its incompatibility with Article 7 of the Law of 14 June 2011, n. 95 (the Ratification and execution of the Oslo Convention on the Banning of Cluster Munitions, passed in Dublin on 30 May 2008). This constitutional conflict was then promptly corrected by the Finance and Treasury Commission, which completed its revision of the text but was however unable to proceed to scheduling and discussing the bill, due to the imminent dissolution of Parliament.

Anti-personnel mines have been banned since 1999, but they continue to explode and kill. Every year 6,400 people lose their lives because of landmines, 92% of them being civilians: these are often referred to as "collateral victims". According to the "Worldwide investments in cluster munitions, a shared responsibility", a report compiled by the Dutch PAX Association, over the last four years, 31 billion dollars have been invested in companies that produce cluster munitions. Six companies account for the lion’s share, two of which are located in China (China Aerospace Science and Industry, and Norinco), two in South Korea (Hanwha and Poongsan) and two in the United States (Orbital ATK and Textron). There are 88 financial institutions which, in different ways, prohibit investments in this sector, and 166 financial institutions in 14 countries involved in various ways in financing the explosive devices’ supply chain.

Italy has said no, by approving the bill titled "Measures to counter the financing of companies manufacturing cluster munitions and submunitions.” This law has a seven-year history: the first proposed law on the subject was presented in the Senate in 2010, with the initial signature of Senator Silvana Amati, while Federica Mogherini - today High Representative of the E.U. for Foreign Affairs and Security policy - submitted a similar proposal to the House. Civil Society had backed this move with an online appeal called NOMONEY4BOMBS, which was backed by ten thousand citizens. Now, the time has come to push urgently to make this law operational. In the meantime, numerous activities have been conducted or launched in Italy to inform students about the danger of unexploded ordnance, and about the international cooperation activities to which Italy has been committed for years, in order to fight the plague of unexploded ordnance and its inhuman effects on civilians. These activities involve diplomatic action plus cooperation and emergency aid, and brochures like the one printed by the Italian Anti-Mine Campaign Non-profit organisation and distributed free to schools, universities, parishes, associations and groups. This is a vital educational contribution, because it concerns young people and because it aims at building a "culture of peace" focused on information about ongoing conflicts, and the responsibility that specific countries have for deliberately feeding them. This kind of sensibility also reigns on the highest hill of Rome, institutionally speaking: the Quirinale, home of Italy’s President.

“Thousands of people in the world - civilians, and among them many children, who have already suffered the tribulations of war and extreme poverty - continue to die, or suffer severe injuries, due to anti-personnel mines, cluster bombs and unexploded ordnance", recalled the Head of State, Sergio Mattarella, in his message dedicated to the International Day of 4 April. "The World Day instituted by the United Nations and dedicated to anti-mine action - underlined the President - constitutes an appeal to international public opinion, institutions and expressions of civil societies, to intensify efforts to achieve the goal of concretely erasing these insidious and barbarous weapons, which represent a peak of monstrosity and which the Ottawa and Oslo conventions have rightly banned. Prohibiting anti-personnel mines, and all devices designed to make large areas of territory uninhabitable, represents a vital starting point for ensuring respect for human rights: not only to reduce the number of war victims, but also to prevent the consequences of conflict from continuing to paralyse community life during post-war transition and reconstruction phases. These vile and bestial weapons aim to destroy hope even for those who search for a future for themselves and their loved ones after a war.” "Humanity - concluded Mattarella - must not tolerate this. Our country will continue to give all possible support to international humanitarian organisations involved in demining plans and in clearing areas violated by these deadly devices, to restore them to their inhabitants. A special gratitude goes to those volunteers and associations who, with admirable civil passion, work in war-tormented places to finally reopen the doors to a dignified future. Finally, on this special Day, I repeat my hope that the Italian Parliament may very soon pass a new legislative resolution, consistent with constitutional principles, to effectively cut financial support for companies producing anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions." Italy has adopted state-of-the-art legislation, but in this phase of parliamentary deadlock, people continue to be killed worldwide by mines that are Made in Italy. Accelerating the timetable for passing the law means saving lives. It is our duty to remember that fact. And - even more so - to act upon it.