"Yes, I expected Merkel to open up to refugees because she was a clever tactic and she had to make up ground after the false step she made in July with the Palestinian girl" but the effects of her impromptu decision can also be disruptive in Eastern Europe and have provoked the unilateral response of England and France in Syria. Giulio Sapelli, Professor of Economic History at the State University of Milan and purebred intellectual is as usual irreverent and against the tide. He sees the positive aspects of Merkel's turnaround but also grasps its limits, as he explains in this interview with FIRSTonline.
Professor Sapelli, did you expect the turning point announced yesterday by Angela Merkel on the opening of the German borders to migrants?
Yes, I expected that. Angela Merkel is a skilled tactician and she had to catch up after the misstep made in July with the Palestinian girl. The terrible sentences pronounced by the Chancellor that day had a very serious effect on German public opinion. Merkel has underestimated the reaction of a Germany she does not know, the Germany of Bonhoeffer, the Germany of Goethe. Despite being a very cultured person, he did not take into account the essence of a country that we often do not perceive from the outside, accustomed as we have been in recent years to seeing the face of dominating Germany, the one that has caused fear and continues to scare the world.
In her opinion, her personal experience as the daughter of a Lutheran pastor born in East Germany also influenced the decision to open the borders, or was it her political intuition that made her understand that it was time to open up and summarize also on this theme the European leadership?
The fact that Angela Merkel's father was a Lutheran pastor has absolutely no effect, on the contrary. His father was an ardent supporter of the Soviet regime, he never opposed it and collaborated with it for a long time. Merkel was in fact the only daughter of a Lutheran pastor to be admitted to university. That of the father is just a fairy tale told by ignorant journalists. But this decision doesn't even come from political intuition, it's just a tactical move. The Chancellor needed to protect herself from right-wing hawks and for this reason she sought the support of German public opinion which, contrary to popular belief, is by no means conservative. This support of her strengthens her politically and gives her new life to continue her mandate.
Can we draw a historical parallel between the Gorbachev-Wojtyla axis and the axis born between Angela Merkel and Bergoglio that opens the doors to migrants?
In my opinion not, also because there is no real axis between Pope Francis and Angela Merkel. Bergoglio addresses the whole world with his words and actions, the Chancellor speaks to German public opinion. You also think of the decision to welcome only Syrians. It's a choice that has something racist about it. Why only Syrians? Because they are the most educated, the richest, the most secular.
Italy was much better at this, much more open and much more supportive, especially in the South. Angela Merkel, on the other hand, was overtaken by the great solidarity of a Germany that was not seen, that Europe did not perceive. The one undertaken by the Chancellor is a dangerous policy on a continental level because it disrupts Europe, but it is a policy that shows the beautiful face of Germany.
Germany has announced that it will welcome 500 migrants a year. You have just mentioned it, what do you think the effects of this choice will be on the economic-social level and on the German and European political level?
As far as the Germans are concerned, Germany is an old society, it lacks skilled workers and welcoming Syrians will only help by providing a new workforce over the years. At the European level, however, the effects could be negative. England and France responded to this improvised policy in the worst possible way: by bombing Syria. This is the absurd effect created by Angela Merkel's policy. She didn't consult anyone before the announcement, she didn't think about what she might have caused. Furthermore, the bombings were decided without an agreement with Russia because it is believed that everything can be resolved without Assad. But the Syrian situation cannot be resolved without negotiating with the Russians and with Assad. This unilateral choice risks having devastating effects internationally.
As far as Europe is concerned, however, this is a move that disintegrates the Union. Germany's main adversaries now (Hungary, Poland, etc.) are its main allies in the deflationary policy that has destroyed the continent: the Teutonic-Baltic bloc. From allies to adversaries and the causes are two. Let me give the example of Poland, the Poles have been under the Communist heel and they don't want to go under the German one. Merkel underestimated Poland's political-cultural complexity. The Poles want to be independent and the Chancellor will pay dearly for this move. She didn't act like a leader. Her decision reminded me of Churchill: Angela Merkel is a politician because she thinks only of tomorrow, but a true statesman thinks of the future.
