Edoardo Bressanelli - 11/06/2012

     The manifesto of Europe’s socialists was presented in Paris on 17th March. The leaders of the main European progressive parties had congregated in support of François Hollande in his (ultimately successful) bid for the French presidency. One spin-off of the meeting was a photo – soon dubbed the “Paris photo” – showing future President Hollande together with German social-democrat leader Gabriel and the Italian PD party-secretary Bersani. While the “Vasto photo” is causing the Democratici a good deal of embarrassment, the “Paris photo” has thrown wide open the question of Europe’s alliances. For while Bersani was busy supporting Hollande, the ex-populars were backing Bayrou’s candidacy.

     While the party-secretary was meeting the leaders of Europe’s main socialist parties, some of his MPs were for holding the PD to its original charter, which was to break down the rigid confines of twentieth-century ideology, including the label of socialist. In order to grasp what is at issue, it helps to remember that there are political parties that have a Union dimension, the most important of them being the European Popular Party and the European Socialist Party (PSE). These are atypical formations, more like federations or networks of national parties than parties in the traditional sense.

     Their “card-carrying members” are not European citizens but national parties. Thus the PSE is an amalgam of socialist, social-democrat, labour and democrat parties from Union member countries. Traditionally the Euro-parties have been in charge of coordinating national parties in drawing up a platform for European elections (or for the party leader summits prior to European Councils). If the Euro-parties have strengthened recently, it is partly thanks to public financing introduced in 2004; again, the Lisbon Treaty enables them to play a decisive role in the choice of Commission President. In the current crisis the socialist parties coordinated under the PSE umbrella have had a field day criticising European austerity and “Merkozy” rigour, against which they advocate an alternative based on growth, solidarity and development; and for the next European elections they will be putting up their own candidate.

     It is quite clear that the European dimension of socialist parties is in a state of ferment, and the PD is in the thick of it. But that is where the problem lies. Our Democrats are not members of the European Socialist Party: Italy’s delegations to that come from the Italian Socialist Party and the Democratici di Sinistra (sic!). As yet the PD lacks a European ‘home’. It works with the PSE but is not in the PSE. The reason for this decision has already been hinted at: the PD is a blend of two political cultures – ex-communist and ex-popular. Affiliation to the ‘old-style’ PSE would not express this novel nuance. But in this way, alone of the big European parties (if one excepts the British Tories), the PD lacks any stable position within Europe.

     What is the cost of that decision, and what other options are open? To answer that question it pays to go back to 2009 when the new parliamentary groups were being set up in the wake of the Euro-Parliament elections. Prior to then the PD MEPs sat partly among the socialist benches and partly with the liberals. Not being able to stand divided through the ensuing legislature, for obvious reasons, the PD weighed all their options carefully. They instantly rejected the idea of joining the ranks of the non-aligned, even temporarily. With the rule system obtaining in the Euro-Parliament, that would spell political irrelevance. The attempt to set up a new political group based on the pro-European credo of the member parties was likewise soon discarded as being impracticable. In the end the PD sought alliance with the PSE group on condition that it change its name to reflect the specific Democrat input.

     Eventually a new formation came into being, the “Socialist and Democratic” group. History now seems to be repeating itself. Reasons of practicality are driving the PD towards the PSE. That is the pole gathering around it all the main opponents to the conservative bloc, the ‘right wing’ which is the Popular Party. Practical considerations, resources and influence over community policy-making render the PSE far more attractive than any alternatives. The problem that now remains is that of the Democrats’ differing identity, their ideological (in)compatibility. But are there really such unbridgeable policy differences? Judging by the way the PD MEPs vote, it would seem not.

     Ninety-five percent of the time when voting is nominal, the Democrats vote with the majority of the socialist group. Studies based on other data, like electoral programmes or surveys by experts, show there is good compatibility. That the division is not so pronounced is also confirmed by Massimo D’Alema being head of the Foundation for European Progressive Studies (the PSE think-tank), not to mention a recent statement by Secretary Bersani to the effect that he fully subscribes to the Paris manifesto. Nevertheless, the time seems not yet ripe for the PD to apply for affiliation with the PSE in next October’s Congress.

     If that were to happen, there would be a tangible risk of the party splitting. But the parliamentary alliance between Socialists and Democrats shows that alternative formulas can be found. Besides, just as the PD has every reason for collaborating with the other progressives of Europe against the conservative bloc, the PSE is equally keen to extend towards what is nowadays the main Italian party.

Edoardo Bressanelli
(Luiss Guido Carli)