ABSTRACT: A letter to Adriano Sofri by some radical exponents where they explain why they will not join the "hunger strike to sympathize with the victims in ex-Yugoslavia" [text n. 5347]. They explain that in their non-violent militancy they have constantly reflected on the meaning of the word "peace", assuming that it is such only if it has a basis of legality. They recognize nonetheless that the regime of Belgrade is the one that primarily opposed the possibility of a civil coexistence in former Yugoslavia, despite ethnic differences, by practising a policy of racial hate and war. There is no trace of all this in the petition for the "sympathetic hunger strike", which seems to affirm "peace by all means" whereas the authors of the letter affirm "legality by all means". [Adriano Sofri's reply at text n. 5349]

--------------

Rome April 5th, 1993

Dear Adriano,

together with intellectuals, representative personalities and democratic militants - including radical ones - you have divulged an appeal to promote a "hunger strike to sympathize with the victims in the former Yugoslavia"; a material solidarity, as you say, capable of overcoming what you rightly call "the most terrible and shameful debacle" suffered by Europe since the war.

In your concern about "what to do" in the face of the tragedy of those countries and of those peoples, we sense all the distress for "the precious fragility of civil coexistence" which is so seriously jeopardized; and clearly, no feeling is more understandable today. But necessary and urgent as it may be, any action should be the result of meditation, and lead to well-grounded and rigorous decisions; there are too many abuses - in words and actions - prompted by those who base a deceitful and intolerable arrogance on them. For such people, the appeal to "peace" and the underlining of the "sufferance" could become necessary alibis, in that they are "unquestionable", not to be discussed. We feel we must refuse this form of blackmail.

Allow us to express our motivations. In our militancy as nonviolent radicals, we have always discussed the meaning which the word "peace" should have. We have long since reached the conclusion that peace cannot be such unless it is based on the law. We respect those who yearn for a peace which is not linked to this condition; however we cannot but warn them immediately and fraternally about the need to face the problem and provide a concrete answer. We know there is the risk of making a mistake; but it is a necessary risk, which surpasses, in terms of method, the mistakes committed by those who preferred not to discriminate the aggressor. You are no doubt aware of the fact that since Münich (but not only...), the appeal to a peace without law has lead to nothing but war, destruction of human lives and of the law.

In your civil and political battles, you have always felt the need to uphold the law, the law of the State. Today, the tragedy of ex-Yugoslavia - as yesterday the invasion of Kuwait - forces us all to face the fare more serious and imperative problem of the creation of an inter- and supranational subject and law, capable of administering the peace with an autonomous coercive force as well as through the general consent of the peoples. We believe this is the borderline that faces anyone who wants to act to reinstate a real "civil coexistence" in the territories of the former Yugoslavia. It therefore becomes necessary to acknowledge that those who oppose this project are based in Belgrade, in that strongly racist, chauvinist, populist regime, and in its putschist army, with Bolshevik roots and military-fascist ideology, which in resumed in 1993 those same theses of "ethnic cleansing" which had already been the basis of Hitler's ideology of the "Great Germany". These are theories, praxis and violence which crea

te victims; not "innocent" victims, but victims that are inevitably tempted, by their own condition, to resort to the violence of despair, of retaliation or even of their own inner demons...In the face of this reality, the fact of advocating an "ecumenical" peace at all costs is terribly dangerous and even unfair, because it ultimately lays the burden of those costs - in terms of justice and of life - on the others. It is no coincidence that the States and the governments of a possibly "democratic", but surely irresponsible Europe, like France vis-à-vis the Spanish tragedy, have endorsed this same position. Such pacifist "culture", which is practiced either unconditionally or fraudulently, is a matter of deep concern for us.

We can see traces of it even in initiatives that originate from extremely different and remote concerns: in other words, rather than a peace at all costs, we privilege the law at all costs - especially when others have to pay the costs.

Taking a clear stance on these problems is a necessary preliminary to the no less necessary choice of action. We, the transnational radical party, are trying in these days to give maximum support to all the initiatives that promote the respect of the embargo against the regime of Belgrade, and the enforcement of the no-fly zone decreed by the U.N., the recognition of Macedonia on the part of the international community, and more generally the toughening of the U.N.'s coercive force, which must increasingly ensure the governability of peace and the growth of the law on a global scale, starting - for example - from the immediate institution of an international Court for crimes of war (already provided for by resolution 808 of the UN Security Council, but far from being enacted).

This is why we feel we cannot endorse a choice which, owing to its ecumenical nature, makes it impossible to identify the aggressor and the useful means to isolate and defeat it.

You will no doubt understand the reasons of "dialogue" and of effective fraternity that lead us to write the above. In such difficult moments, the militant cooperation calls for a further effort of tolerance and clarity, which we felt we could not shirk.

Fraternally yours,

Emma Bonino

Sergio Stanzani

Angiolo Bandinelli

Roberto Cicciomessere

Translator's notes

(1) BONINO EMMA. (Bra 1948). President of the Radical Party, former member of the European Parliament; member of of the Italian Parliament as of 1976. Among the promoters of the CISA (Information Centre on Sterilization and Abortion) and an active militant in the campaign against clandestine abortion. She was tried and acquitted in Florence. Participated in the conduction, on a national and international scale, of the campaign on World Hunger. Among the founding members of "Food and Disarmament International", promoted the circulation of the Manifesto of Nobel Laureates.

(2) STANZANI GHEDINI SERGIO AUGUSTO. (Bologna 1923). Exponent of the Italian Students Association in the '50s; among the founders of the Radical Party. Senator and member of Parliament, currently secretary of the Radical Party. Former IRI executive. Engineer.

(3) BANDINELLI ANGIOLO. (Chianciano 1927). Writer. Former member of the Partito d'Azione; secretary of the Radical Party in 1969, 1971 and 1972; he was also treasurer of the party for five years. In 1979 local councillor in Rome, deputy in the ninth legislature. For many years, editor of several radical publications ("La Prova Radicale", "Notizie Radicali", etc), author of essays and articles relative to the history and the theory of the party, many of which are contained in the book "Il radicale impunito". Currently writes for newspapers and magazines and for Radio Radicale with notes and editorials.

(4) CICCIOMESSERE ROBERTO. (Bolzano 1948). Radical deputy belonging to the European Federalist Group. Conscientious objector, was arrested and convicted; following his initiative, in 1972 this civil right was recognized in Italy. In 1970 treasurer of the Radical party, which he was also secretary of in 1971 and 1984. In 1969 he was secretary of the LID (Italian League for Divorce), member of the European Parliament from 1984 to 1989. Creator and organizer of "AGORA' telematica", a multilingual computer communications system.

(5) SOFRI ADRIANO. (1942). Leader of the Italian political movement "Lotta Continua". Journalist and writer. Tried and convicted to twenty years of prison as the presumed author of the assassination of the police commissioner Luigi Calabresi. Author of memoirs.