Since the victory of Giorgia Meloni in the parliamentary elections in Italy, many Western countries have been very concerned about the new right-wing orientations of the Prime Minister, especially about Italy’s official position on Russian military operations in Ukraine.
The Brothers of Italy party led by Meloni is seen by many as a symbol of the past that Italy is trying to forget, far from the controversy of fascism accusations that some also make. It is not realistic, by the way, that Meloni’s political program, despite the profound negative symbolism of its name, is most controversial because of its conservative social orientation.
In any case, it is Italy’s contemporary history that most worries observers. Italian politics, far from the distant past, has experienced sharp fluctuations in recent decades. It was presented by Berlusconi, the famous real estate billionaire whom many see as a proactive version of former US President Donald Trump.
It should not be forgotten that Meloni was Minister of Youth in the Berlusconi government. Georgia Meloni tried to distance herself from the historical origins of her party. She rejected accusations that her party’s governance could revive fascism and said that her party’s values resembled those of the British Conservative Party, the Republican Party in the US and the Likud Party in Israel.
However, she did not deny her hostility to illegal immigrants and her links to far-right parties in Europe, such as the French National Rally and the Spanish Vox, as well as to the American right. She has already expressed her admiration for Hungary’s populist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Realistically, the right-wing current that has emerged in Europe in recent years is not limited to Italy.
Its rise has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine, although it may help accelerate the rise of this current, whether in Italy or elsewhere in the future. It should not be forgotten that last April, French President Macron engaged in a fierce rivalry with Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Rally party, which opposes the influence of the EU and immigration. Macron won the presidency.
But it should not be forgotten that Le Pen achieved a remarkable result with 41% of the vote. However, she is the one who most rejects the values of coexistence and diversity, saying, “A multicultural society is a multiconflict society.”
About two months ago, the ultra-nationalist Sweden Democrats, with their National Socialist roots, came in second in the Swedish elections, with most predictions that the other European countries will follow suit.
We in the Middle East should not stop at the issue of Islamophobia, because these parties reject other things that are of greater importance to the lives of Europeans themselves, including the very idea of European unity. I don’t think Meloni and others will stick to their slogans if they come to power.
But that does not diminish the impact of these ideas or the growing right-wing extremism in Europe. Some see European right-wing politicians as an imminent threat to the future of the EU. But I have said before that the European idea is threatened not only by the right-wing trend, but also by the apparent disunity within the EU on other immediate issues, such as the Russia sanctions.
This is the bomb most likely to explode in the face of a united Europe. There is a widening gap between supporters of tightening sanctions and tougher policies against Putin’s threats and supporters of reviewing sanctions against Russia and the need for dialogue with Russia to safeguard European interests. The biggest problem of the European far right is extreme nationalism.
It is a development that the world has already paid dearly for with bloody wars, and like the extremism we suffer in our Muslim countries, with the difference that Islamist organizations in the Islamic world resort much to violence and terrorism to impose their ideas and agenda and even to try to gain power.
But extremists in Europe are at the top of the scene through the ballot box and democratic mechanisms that are difficult to challenge, so they have social legitimacy that qualifies them to lead their country. Only here the question arises whether democracy is a pathology or a medicine?
Many experts and researchers see the ballot box as the best solution to the crises afflicting many Arab and Muslim societies. Yet those they reject in Europe, for example, have come about through democratic mechanisms, and some of these crises are a direct product of the ballot box, which everyone thought was the ideal remedy for conflict, not knowing that there is no democracy without democrats.
Frankly, the alleged defense of Christian identity in Europe reminds me of extremist organizations in our region when they defend the Islamic identity of peoples. While the European right is hostile to immigrants, the most important symbol of Christianity in the world, Pope Francis II, takes a remarkable stance by calling for help for refugees, calling them “our brothers and sisters.”
I do not want to dwell too much on the dialectic of Islamophobia that many assume to explain their hostility to the European far right, although it is a fact. My starting point in the debate is neither religious, nor national, nor ethnic. Rather, I am speaking here from a political-analytical point of view.
It should be recognized that the European right is not a threat to the idea of democracy, as is the case with religious groups and movements in the East. But it could pose a threat to the integration blocs, especially to the EU.
So withdrawal and isolationism, contrary to the idea of globalization and the integration phase that the world has been dreaming of since the end of the Cold War, is not in anyone’s interest. Isolation means the rejection of coexistence, the rejection of the other, the spread of hatred and the return of the world to a stage of endless international conflicts.
