Europe sidelined” “

The unusual war or military operation in Afghanistan, mainly conducted by the USA which has in various ways supported the ground offensive of the Northern Alliance against the Taleban, seems (the verb seems de rigueur) approaching its end with the Bonn Conference that has now opened. This is a special event in a particularly delicate moment since – given the peculiarity of this “war” declared against terrorism – it is impossible to say today that the Conference really will put an end to the Afghan conflict. Indeed, there are those who fear that this conflict will have unpredictable developments and dangerous repercussions. In fact, in the regrettable hypothesis that this conflict be not rapidly concluded and that the parties attending the Bonn Conference be not really representative of the various factions present on Afghan territory, the question already posed in Bosnia, Kosovo or in the Middle East would then be posed anew: the question, namely, concerning the identification of those who really control the situation: in other words, those able to transform the word given or the signature placed on a document into something real which, in the specific case of Afghanistan, would essentially consist in the simultaneous suspension of terrorist acts and the retaliation against them. But, even without entering into the merits or otherwise of the composition of the various delegations, other than noting with approval the presence of several women (even assuming it were merely symbolic), there are at least two points that are destined to draw attention. They concern respectively: the results expected from this international conference; and the role that Europe might play in Afghanistan. It is clear that some results may be expected to come out of the Bonn Conference since those participating in it are those who effectively hold power in the country, though each within his own limits. That said, and given that the Bonn Conference is being held under the auspices of the United Nations, in the presence and with the mediation of the UN special envoy in Afghanistan, the Algerian Lakhdar Brahimi, it is probable that various proposals will be evaluated concerning for instance: the creation of a provisional government on which the anti-Taleban forces could converge; and the establishment of a regime comparable to the kind of trustee administration already tested in Bosnia and in Kosovo, and aimed at facilitating the creation of a democratic State. Perhaps the times are not yet ripe for the various factions to agree on who should govern Afghan territory, even provisionally, or how they should govern it in such a way as to transform it into a democratic State. Of course, the level of poverty in Afghanistan, coupled with the lack of education of the majority of the population, is destined to place a question mark over the thesis according to which the development of a people is consequential on the establishment of democracy: in cases like this it is clear that democracy and development can only proceed, not by cause and effect, but in tandem. That means that, if terrorism is to be eroded by detaching it from poverty and integralism, a great effort will have to be made to raise this area, so rich in raw materials, to conditions of life and democracy compatible with the usual standards. The question of the role of Europe remains to be considered. We must ask ourselves whether the offer of mere “hospitality” does not conceal Germany’s intention to pose, if not as the architect, at least as the mediator (after the UNO) of peace, with the aim of being able to claim for herself a preferential role and a position of prestige either in the formation of a caretaker regime or in the economic reconstruction of Afghanistan. Whatever the case, Europe’s role is the crisis is reduced: first, because, on the military level, the USA has recognized that even those European States with which it seemed to have established preferential relations have played a negligible role, tacitly rebuking Europe for being unable to create a system of common defence, and second, because, on the diplomatic level, the European Union itself has revealed its deficiencies in terms of a common foreign policy. Even the presence at the Conference of the Belgian Prime Minister, current president of the EU Council, seems rather marginal and in any case not sufficiently significant to give to Europe the role that Europe had hoped to play in the solution of the conflict.