As concerns external non-local opposition elements (apodictic pacifism and anti-Americanism) it will be necessary to intervene with a well thought-out information campaign that, of course, must not regard only the Commissioner.
The three day protest – increasingly characterized by anti-globalization elements – that took place in Vicenza from Thursday, September 13 to Saturday, September 15, at the conclusion of an activist campout that lasted from September 6 to 16, could be the last demonstration of opposition enjoying local support; but only if we act in a timely manner to eliminate the reasonable concerns – because they are valid – of this opposition. I am referring to the concern over traffic created by access to the new base, which could increase the problems of an already difficult traffic situation due to the historic formation of the city of Vicenza, and that of the use of the last important large green area of the city for the base expansion. These are reasonable concerns that should be separated once and for all from those tied to anti-Americanism, anti-Militarism a/o apolitical pacifism, that is, from the concerns that have nothing to do with the characteristics of the new U.S. military base in Vicenza.
After months of relative calm, due to the summer vacation period and the possibility of an alternative solution of lesser impact disclosed by the Commissioner in its communications and in its authorizations for the advancement of the project, today there are renewed risks due to the activities of the Presidio Permanente supported by the anti-globalization movements of the North East, if not those of all of Italy and beyond. It is foreseeable that tensions will increase as soon as the initial work of clearing the area, work already under contract, begins.
This is, therefore, the moment to intervene decisively and transform the possible alternative solution, which has already been made public, into a definite solution, and to start using this alternative solution in communications.
We need to be able to state – with certainty – that the new U.S. military base is nothing more that the reuse, with some expansion, of the area west of the runway, already in use by the Italian Air Force and therefore the area east of the runway, the large open field that would have been destroyed according to the first proposal, and which ignited the local opposition, would remain intact. This assertion, together with another that has already been put forth, that access to the new base will be organized, both temporarily and in the long term, so that it will not interfere with the local traffic and above all traffic crossing the historic center of Vicenza, would remove all reasonable concerns of the opposition movement.
If I may I would add, as must be added, that Vicenza will be compensated for its “sacrifice” with the completion of the new road north of the city and with other possible initiatives in the areas of higher education and health care, the complete package should pave the way for the project.
But it is imperative that we make use of all means and do so immediately.
In order to do this, it is necessary to complete the work that I have conducted, also during the month of August, with U.S. representatives (in Vicenza with the U.S. commander of Camp Ederle, in Rome with the U.S. Embassy, and in Venice during a meeting with Rep. Loretta Sanchez, Chair [note: she is a member but not chair] of the House Armed Services Committee) to convince them that the alternative “west” solution, though technically more complicated, is instead the only solution that, if defined immediately, can make it through the authorization process and possible legal proceedings while still meeting deadlines foreseen by the United States for the transfer of the paratrooper contingent from Germany to Italy. I demonstrated to the U.S. officials how it is still possible to respect the deadlines with the “west” solution, while I warned them that this solution is certainly more costly (and therefore they must obtain the additional funds needed from now to 2011).
The Prime Minister is aware of this proposed solution and he has given me the go ahead.
It follows that several documents from the respective Ministries will be necessary, first and foremost the Defense Ministry.
The first, and this is crucial, is the definition and respect of a date not after June 30, 2008 for the liberation on the part of the Italian Air Force of the Dal Molin area. I realize there are some difficulties, also of a financial nature, tied to the helicopter maintenance program, however these must be overcome — perhaps taking advantage of the budget session that will take place at the end of the month — because the definition of a date is a fundamental condition to reassure the U.S. regarding the respect of deadlines for the completion of the project. The decision should be made by the end of the month in order to add it as an amendment to the call for bids to be published by September 30, 2007 so that bidding companies will be in a position to consider this date in the offers they must present by October 16, 2007.
It is evident that this decision must be communicated in a timely manner to General Enrico Pino of the COMIPA (Joint Committee on Military Servitude) of the Veneto Region, which will examine the project – both solutions east and west of the runway – on September 26, 2007.
The second regards the decision of whether or not the expansion project of the U.S. military base in Vicenza is subject to a VIA (Evaluation of Environmental Impact).
It is clear that this point represents an obvious risk to the possibilities of proceeding while respecting deadlines; and it is possible that it could even put the final decision in jeopardy, since currently is it entirely predictable (and has already been practically announced) that the Minister of the Environment intends to subject the project to a VIA. This can only give rise to likely obstacles – the case of the MOSE project has set an indicative precedent – capable of being resolved only through the extreme solution of a resolution by the Council of Ministers, which could result in lacerations that in a moment such as this I believe are better avoided.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
