Address delivered by Marco Pannella (1) at the European Parliament on 19 January 1988

ABSTRACT: Deplores the fact that the President of the European Parliament, while a discussion on Yugoslavia is under way, commends the concept of "non-alignment". Yugoslavia should not be cheered for the fact that it is "independent and non-aligned", because the real way to freedom "is that of inter-dependence". Moreover, it is a "mistake" to treat Yugoslavia "with complacency". No country should "endanger the fundamental rights of the individual", and therefore Yugoslavia must be asked to explain what is going on in Kosovo or its "national-nationalist illusion". These things should be discussed openly and with "confidence" with Yugoslavia.

(1994 - IL QUOTIDIANO RADICALE, Special European Parliament, 26 November 1993)

Mr President,

the homage you are paying to the concept of non-alignment is irresponsible, not to say hypocritical. Things were different in the times of Bangdung, in the years of the Cold War. Non-alignment means absence, and you are pushing Yugoslavia to just that by paying this precise, useless and irresponsible homage, which costs you nothing. A country with a population of 22 million cannot be transformed into a market economy. It is a deception, because in 1992, in the absence of any form of democratic control, it is the law of the economic jungle that will reign in our European countries that will have reached agreements with the Comecon. This means driving a serious government and population to suicide. Yugoslavia is cheered because it is independent and non-aligned, But then, why is France not independent and non-aligned? Why is Germany not independent? The way to freedom is the way of inter-dependence, not that of a useless independence which stems from a romantic and nationalist conception which does not take i

nto account the historical reality.

Learning to resist the terrorist threats without endangering the fundamental rights of the individual: this is the duty for all countries that work with the European Community and also with Yugoslavia. I believe, Mr President, honourable colleagues, that we can foster the hope that Yugoslavia is heading in the right direction. The Bettiza report will encourage it to persevere on this way and towards progress. Mr President, the quality of the report is no surprise to us. We know the quality of the author and his deep knowledge of this subject.

This said, if we agree on the report and, more or less, with the action of our community - and when I say "our community" I'm referring to an operating community; I find the Council increasingly becomes a clause, since it is not represented here now - we agree, Mr President, Mr President of the Council, but especially honourable colleagues and especially colleague Bettiza, on the fact that it is a mistake to treat Yugoslavia with complacency. Why not ask Yugoslavia what we ask of our countries? How not to express the veto that the Yugoslav republic subscribe the European convention of the rights of man? The thing frightens you. You don't want this to be written in the report. I hope so, and I have tabled an amendment in this direction. Why not mention Kosovo? In Italy there are people who have spent four years in prison before being tried. Now everyone agrees on the fact that this is infamous, not worthy of a European justice, of the justice of a democratic state. Why not pose the same problem for Kosovo, an

d why should our friends from Yugoslavia have such an inferiority complex as to be offended if we told about them what we say about ourselves? I do not agree, Mr Bettiza, with your caution, which I consider rash.

Also, why not mention the national-nationalist and, on the cultural level, isolationist deception, in Yugoslavia, while we are here because we do not believe in the national dimension, because we do not believe that the states can each solve the problems we face? Why not clearly state that we advocate the association of Yugoslavia to our community? This policy, this power policy was fine only in 1814! Was it necessary once again to pay homage to the myth of the national revolutions, whereas we are here to carry out a revolution against the stupidity of the national and nationalist deception? In Kosovo as in South Tirol, there is not only the problem of the natives. There is also, for instance, the problem of the Serbs and Croats, who live in their region and who risk seeing their rights completely denied by the local Albanian majority. In South Tirol the German-speaking population has been given several rights, and the Italians had the duty to grant them. But now we need to defend the rights of the Italian-

speaking population in the face of the ideas expressed by the Sudtiroler Volkspartei.

Lastly, no one can blame us for facing these subjects. Let's talk about it with Yugoslavia, because only by reaching this level in our relations can we truly show our friendship for this country. Friendship requires trust. The Yugoslavs can teach us many things: why not discuss our respective fundamental values?

Translator's notes

(1) PANNELLA MARCO. Pannella Giacinto, known as Marco. (Teramo 1930). Currently President of the Radical Party's Federal Council, which he is one of the founders of. At twenty national university representative of the Liberal Party, at twenty-two President of the UGI, the union of lay university students, at twenty-three President of the UNURI, national union of Italian university students. At twenty-four he advocates, in the context of the students' movement and of the Liberal party, the foundation of the new radical party, which arises in 1954 following the confluence of prestigious intellectuals and minor democratic political groups. He is active in the party, except for a period (1960-1963) in which he is correspondent for "Il Giorno" in Paris, where he established contacts with the Algerian resistance. Back in Italy, he commits himself to the reconstruction of the radical Party, dissolved by its leadership following the advent of the centre-left. Under his indisputable leadership, the party succeeds in

promoting (and winning) relevant civil rights battles, working for the introduction of divorce, conscientious objection, important reforms of family law, etc, in Italy. He struggles for the abrogation of the Concordat between Church and State. Arrested in Sofia in 1968 as he is demonstrating in defence of Czechoslovakia, which has been invaded by Stalin. He opens the party to the newly-born homosexual organizations (FUORI), promotes the formation of the first environmentalist groups. The new radical party organizes difficult campaigns, proposing several referendums (about twenty throughout the years) for the moralization of the country and of politics, against public funds to the parties, against nuclear plants, etc., but in particular for a deep renewal of the administration of justice. Because of these battles, all carried out with strictly nonviolent methods according to the Gandhian model - but Pannella's Gandhi is neither a mystic nor an ideologue; rather, an intransigent and yet flexible politician - h

e has been through trials which he has for the most part won. As of 1976, year in which he first runs for Parliament, he is always elected at the Chamber of Deputies, twice at the Senate, twice at the European Parliament. Several times candidates and local councillor in Rome, Naples, Trieste, Catania, where he carried out exemplary and demonstrative campaigns and initiatives. Whenever necessary, he has resorted to the weapon of the hunger strike, not only in Italy but also in Europe, in particular during the major campaign against world hunger, for which he mobilized one hundred Nobel laureates and preeminent personalities in the fields of science and culture in order to obtain a radical change in the management of the funds allotted to developing countries. On 30 September 1981 he obtains at the European parliament the passage of a resolution in this sense, and after it several other similar laws in the Italian and Belgian Parliament. In January 1987 he runs for President of the European Parliament, obtaini

ng 61 votes. Currently, as the radical party has pledged to no longer compete with its own lists in national elections, he is striving for the creation of a "transnational" cross-party, in view of a federal development of the United States of Europe and with the objective of promoting civil rights throughout the world.