Latest from Italy

Premier on X after meeting with Zelensky

Premier on X after meeting with Zelensky

"I'll kill you all." Years of violence and beatings to family members, including a disabled son

Dear Avvenire, Weaponisation is a "nice" Anglophone neologism which, as far as I know, made its official entry into EU documents a few weeks ago. In particular, the term appears on pages 25 and 27 of Ursula von der Leyen's Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029. It is said that «we are witnessing a weaponisation of all types of politics, from energy, to migration and climate. As a result, our rules-based international order is breaking down and our global institutions have become less effective” (p. 25). Weaponization means the tendency to transform everything into weapons, infrastructure, energy, food, food reserves, financial wealth and, today, we see it in Lebanon, even pagers and walkie-talkies... Umberto Baldocchi Dear Professor Baldocchi, I had to reduce your long and acute analysis to a single taste. The central idea, however, is clear, and she thus helps us to understand a worrying dynamic of our times. The EU Commission's programmatic document could therefore not ignore it. Transforming elements of our daily life into weapons is an act that immediately appears hateful to us and which is not an invention of recent years, but an ancient form of oppression of man by man. Let us think of the shortages knowingly caused to bring both external and internal enemies to their knees. The great famine in Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century was at least supported by London's policies, while the Holodomór suffered by Ukraine between 1932 and 1933 constituted, in the opinion of many historians and states, a genocide carried out by Moscow in against the province rebelling against collectivization. Coming to the present day, globalization, by relating economies and societies with a strong mutual interdependence, increases the opportunities to implement blackmail by those with imperialistic projects or even more modest enrichment objectives. This can be seen in energy and, unfortunately, also in migrant flows. A "weapon" tragically used by Belarus and Libya ("Avvenire" has always been at the forefront in denouncing these crimes). Today we see and talk about with horror the "militarization" (we could translate as weaponisation) of consumer electronics too, because the pagers detonated in Lebanon belong to this category (doctors in hospitals still use them in our country). Civilian instruments that are transformed into subtle means of war, as I have already had the opportunity to write in the heat of the moment. In this way, trust is undermined in systems that are now an integral part of our lives, which should be protected by the rules of humanitarian law that distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, as is already the case for homes and infrastructures. Your conclusion, dear Baldocchi, is negative on the European Union's ability to escape from this logic, with a consequent loss of democracy. I don't agree. Detecting a phenomenon does not mean approving it. The EU should, of course, be more incisive in the theaters of conflict at its borders, supporting the right of those attacked to defend themselves but also implementing diplomatic initiatives to try to stop endless conflicts. This is the hope and invitation that we must urgently address at the beginning of the European legislature. A propitious moment that we cannot waste. © all rights reserved

Dear Avvenire, Weaponisation is a "nice" Anglophone neologism which, as far as I know, made its official entry into EU documents a few weeks ago. In particular, the term appears on pages 25 and 27 of Ursula von der Leyen's Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029. It is said that «we are witnessing a weaponisation of all types of politics, from energy, to migration and climate. As a result, our rules-based international order is breaking down and our global institutions have become less effective” (p. 25). Weaponization means the tendency to transform everything into weapons, infrastructure, energy, food, food reserves, financial wealth and, today, we see it in Lebanon, even pagers and walkie-talkies... Umberto Baldocchi Dear Professor Baldocchi, I had to reduce your long and acute analysis to a single taste. The central idea, however, is clear, and it thus helps us understand a worrying dynamic of our times. The EU Commission's programmatic document could therefore not ignore it. Transforming elements of our daily life into weapons is an act that immediately appears hateful to us and which is not an invention of recent years, but an ancient form of oppression of man by man. Let us think of the shortages knowingly caused to bring both external and internal enemies to their knees. The great famine in Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century was at least supported by London's policies, while the Holodomór suffered by Ukraine between 1932 and 1933 constituted, in the opinion of many historians and states, a genocide carried out by Moscow in against the province rebelling against collectivization. Coming to the present day, globalization, by relating economies and societies with a strong mutual interdependence, increases the opportunities to implement blackmail by those with imperialistic projects or even more modest enrichment objectives. This can be seen in energy and, unfortunately, also in migrant flows. A "weapon" tragically used by Belarus and Libya ("Avvenire" has always been at the forefront in denouncing these crimes). Today we see and talk about with horror the "militarization" (we could translate as weaponisation) of consumer electronics too, because the pagers detonated in Lebanon belong to this category (doctors in hospitals still use them in our country). Civilian instruments that are transformed into subtle means of war, as I have already had the opportunity to write in the heat of the moment. In this way, trust is undermined in systems that are now an integral part of our lives, which should be protected by the rules of humanitarian law that distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, as is already the case for homes and infrastructures. Your conclusion, dear Baldocchi, is negative on the European Union's ability to escape from this logic, with a consequent loss of democracy. I don't agree. Detecting a phenomenon does not mean approving it. The EU should, of course, be more incisive in the theaters of conflict at its borders, supporting the right of those attacked to defend themselves but also implementing diplomatic initiatives to try to stop endless conflicts. This is the hope and invitation that we must urgently address at the beginning of the European legislature. A propitious moment that we cannot waste. © all rights reserved

Dear Avvenire, Weaponisation is a "nice" Anglophone neologism which, as far as I know, made its official entry into EU documents a few weeks ago. In particular, the term appears on pages 25 and 27 of Ursula von der Leyen's Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029. It is said that «we are witnessing a weaponisation of all types of politics, from energy, to migration and climate. As a result, our rules-based international order is breaking down and our global institutions have become less effective” (p. 25). Weaponization means the tendency to transform everything into weapons, infrastructure, energy, food, food reserves, financial wealth and, today, we see it in Lebanon, even pagers and walkie-talkies... Umberto Baldocchi Dear Professor Baldocchi, I had to reduce your long and acute analysis to a single taste. The central idea, however, is clear, and she thus helps us to understand a worrying dynamic of our times. The EU Commission's programmatic document could therefore not ignore it. Transforming elements of our daily life into weapons is an act that immediately appears hateful to us and which is not an invention of recent years, but an ancient form of oppression of man by man. Let us think of the shortages knowingly caused to bring both external and internal enemies to their knees. The great famine in Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century was at least supported by London's policies, while the Holodomór suffered by Ukraine between 1932 and 1933 constituted, in the opinion of many historians and states, a genocide carried out by Moscow in against the province rebelling against collectivization. Coming to the present day, globalization, by relating economies and societies with a strong mutual interdependence, increases the opportunities for blackmail to be carried out by those with imperialistic projects or even more modest objectives of enrichment. This can be seen in energy and, unfortunately, also in migrant flows. A "weapon" tragically used by Belarus and Libya ("Avvenire" has always been at the forefront in denouncing these crimes). Today we see and talk about with horror the "militarization" (we could translate as weaponisation) of consumer electronics too, because the pagers detonated in Lebanon belong to this category (doctors in hospitals still use them in our country). Civilian instruments that are transformed into subtle means of war, as I have already had the opportunity to write in the heat of the moment. In this way, trust is undermined in systems that are now an integral part of our lives, which should be protected by the rules of humanitarian law that distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, as is already the case for homes and infrastructures. Your conclusion, dear Baldocchi, is negative on the European Union's ability to escape from this logic, with a consequent loss of democracy. I don't agree. Detecting a phenomenon does not mean approving it. The EU should, of course, be more incisive in the theaters of conflict at its borders, supporting the right of those attacked to defend themselves but also implementing diplomatic initiatives to try to stop endless conflicts. This is the hope and invitation that we must urgently address at the beginning of the European legislature. A propitious moment that we cannot waste. © all rights reserved

Dear Avvenire, Weaponisation is a "nice" Anglophone neologism which, as far as I know, made its official entry into EU documents a few weeks ago. In particular, the term appears on pages 25 and 27 of Ursula von der Leyen's Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029. It is said that «we are witnessing a weaponisation of all types of politics, from energy, to migration and climate. As a result, our rules-based international order is breaking down and our global institutions have become less effective” (p. 25). Weaponization means the tendency to transform everything into weapons, infrastructure, energy, food, food reserves, financial wealth and, today, we see it in Lebanon, even pagers and walkie-talkies... Umberto Baldocchi Dear Professor Baldocchi, I had to reduce your long and acute analysis to a single taste. The central idea, however, is clear, and she thus helps us to understand a worrying dynamic of our times. The EU Commission's programmatic document could therefore not ignore it. Transforming elements of our daily life into weapons is an act that immediately appears hateful to us and which is not an invention of recent years, but an ancient form of oppression of man by man. Let us think of the shortages knowingly caused to bring both external and internal enemies to their knees. The great famine in Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century was at least supported by London's policies, while the Holodomór suffered by Ukraine between 1932 and 1933 constituted, in the opinion of many historians and states, a genocide carried out by Moscow in against the province rebelling against collectivization. Coming to the present day, globalization, by relating economies and societies with a strong mutual interdependence, increases the opportunities to implement blackmail by those with imperialistic projects or even more modest enrichment objectives. This can be seen in energy and, unfortunately, also in migrant flows. A "weapon" tragically used by Belarus and Libya ("Avvenire" has always been at the forefront in denouncing these crimes). Today we see and talk about with horror the "militarization" (we could translate as weaponisation) of consumer electronics too, because the pagers detonated in Lebanon belong to this category (doctors in hospitals still use them in our country). Civilian instruments that are transformed into subtle means of war, as I have already had the opportunity to write in the heat of the moment. In this way, trust is undermined in systems that are now an integral part of our lives, which should be protected by the rules of humanitarian law that distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, as is already the case for homes and infrastructures. Your conclusion, dear Baldocchi, is negative on the European Union's ability to escape from this logic, with a consequent loss of democracy. I don't agree. Detecting a phenomenon does not mean approving it. The EU should, of course, be more incisive in the theaters of conflict at its borders, supporting the right of those attacked to defend themselves but also implementing diplomatic initiatives to try to stop endless conflicts. This is the hope and invitation that we must urgently address at the beginning of the European legislature. A propitious moment that we cannot waste. © all rights reserved

Dear Avvenire, Weaponisation is a "nice" Anglophone neologism which, as far as I know, made its official entry into EU documents a few weeks ago. In particular, the term appears on pages 25 and 27 of Ursula von der Leyen's Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029. It is said that «we are witnessing a weaponisation of all types of politics, from energy, to migration and climate. As a result, our rules-based international order is breaking down and our global institutions have become less effective” (p. 25). Weaponization means the tendency to transform everything into weapons, infrastructure, energy, food, food reserves, financial wealth and, today, we see it in Lebanon, even pagers and walkie-talkies... Umberto Baldocchi Dear Professor Baldocchi, I had to reduce your long and acute analysis to a single taste. The central idea, however, is clear, and it thus helps us understand a worrying dynamic of our times. The EU Commission's programmatic document could therefore not ignore it. Transforming elements of our daily life into weapons is an act that immediately appears hateful to us and which is not an invention of recent years, but an ancient form of oppression of man by man. Let us think of the shortages knowingly caused to bring both external and internal enemies to their knees. The great famine in Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century was at least supported by London's policies, while the Holodomór suffered by Ukraine between 1932 and 1933 constituted, in the opinion of many historians and states, a genocide carried out by Moscow in against the province rebelling against collectivization. Coming to the present day, globalization, by relating economies and societies with a strong mutual interdependence, increases the opportunities to implement blackmail by those with imperialistic projects or even more modest enrichment objectives. This can be seen in energy and, unfortunately, also in migrant flows. A "weapon" tragically used by Belarus and Libya ("Avvenire" has always been at the forefront in denouncing these crimes). Today we see and talk about with horror the "militarization" (we could translate as weaponisation) of consumer electronics too, because the pagers detonated in Lebanon belong to this category (doctors in hospitals still use them in our country). Civilian instruments that are transformed into subtle means of war, as I have already had the opportunity to write in the heat of the moment. In this way, trust is undermined in systems that are now an integral part of our lives, which should be protected by the rules of humanitarian law that distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, as is already the case for homes and infrastructures. Your conclusion, dear Baldocchi, is negative on the European Union's ability to escape from this logic, with a consequent loss of democracy. I don't agree. Detecting a phenomenon does not mean approving it. The EU should, of course, be more incisive in the theaters of conflict at its borders, supporting the right of those attacked to defend themselves but also implementing diplomatic initiatives to try to stop endless conflicts. This is the hope and invitation that we must urgently address at the beginning of the European legislature. A propitious moment that we cannot waste. © all rights reserved

MotoGP, Dakar and now the first successes in Superbike too: "In Cremona I closed a circle"

The speech at the Atlantic Council gala is a praise of Western patriotism and conservative values. The award received by the founder of Tesla and Trump's sponsor