Identifying an opportunity for development and growth amid a deep and lacerating crisis—such as the situation in Gaza or the war in Ukraine- this is the imperative for the EU, according to Mr Manciulli, who shared with Decode39 an extensive reflection on the delicate international moment the Old Continent is facing.
Why he matters: Andrea Manciulli, Director of Institutional Relations at the Med-Or Italian Foundation, brings rare cross-sector experience spanning high-level politics, NATO leadership, and the defence industry. A military historian and counterterrorism expert, he has shaped Italy’s legislative and strategic approach to jihadist threats, international missions, and transatlantic security.
Q: What could change in Europe’s perception, not only on the first day of the Board of Peace, but also in light of an assembly that differs from traditional ones, such as the United Nations?
A: Beyond the undoubtedly disruptive impact that the new Trump presidency has had on the global landscape, what Europe should do is, to me, quite clear. In the world now taking shape, Europe is a continent that no longer fits the new reality, because that reality has fundamentally changed. After the events in Ukraine and Putin’s decision to restore force as a central element, Europe remains economically strong.
- Still, it is far less capable of operating in a global political environment where power has once again become indispensable. It is also evident that Trump has inaugurated a new season of unilateralism that risks weakening Western cohesion. Yesterday’s photograph of the Board of Peace was a vivid illustration of this.
- Precisely for this reason, a great responsibility falls on Europe: to keep alive the values and foundations of a cohesive West anchored in democracy and freedom. The transatlantic bond was born from a shared outlook and a community of values; it cannot be based on the choice to follow unilateral impulses regardless of their direction.
Q: What should be done from an ideal, value-based, and political standpoint?
A: First of all, this new dimension makes the Europe we have built—an Europe composed of many countries—an inadequate format because it is too inclusive. It worked in the post–Cold War era because it expanded the space of democracy. But if the goal now is to make Europe a pillar strengthening the West, with a strategic and military role, change is necessary.
- It is important to bring together the main countries of Eastern Europe—Italy, Germany, Spain, France, and Poland, which have become the leading countries of the region—without forgetting the Scandinavian countries, which represent the gateway to the Arctic.
- At the same time, Europe must forge ever-stronger bonds with distant yet highly strategic allies such as Japan, Canada, Australia, and South Korea.
- Starting from this European core is essential to building a new perspective, without which it will be difficult to navigate the coming phase.
Q: How will relations with the United Kingdom evolve?
A: The Brexit perspective has run its course and, objectively, has not been a success. The relationship must be rebuilt, and, regardless of Trump, this would benefit the West.
Q: How can Europe pursue this objective while updating contingent elements such as European defence, NATO reform, and the strengthening of Atlanticism?
A: Atlanticism, born in the aftermath of World War II, did not arise from mere sympathy among countries but from a crucial foundation of shared values. NATO is first and foremost a political alliance, based on a certain vision of society—defence of democracy, freedom, the market, and free enterprise—shaped by the clash between democratic and totalitarian worlds in the Second World War. If we bring that divide into the present, it has become even more complex for several reasons.
Q: Which ones?
A: First, because autocratic regimes have not diminished; they have only changed form and are in some ways harder to counter. They are less totalitarian in the classic sense but far more pervasive. China, for example, combines strong autocratic traits with immense economic power and has expanded its influence—relatively peacefully—across the world, particularly in Asia and Africa.
- That is the core of the challenge, and the West must start again from this reality, recognising that defending democracy today means confronting issues that did not exist at the end of World War II, such as the communication society and new technologies.
- Defending democracy in a static world is not the same as doing so in a world shaped by social media and new communication tools that create the illusion of direct democracy and participation—often more illusory than real and lacking clear rules.
Q: Is the repression of social media a relevant example?
A: Yes. Countries such as China and Russia repress the use of social media domestically, while Western countries—where access is freer—are the ones most exposed to offensive operations from others.
-
- This demonstrates the fragility of the democratic space in which we live. We are the freest but also the most vulnerable, and this requires an evolution of democracy so that it can defend itself against distorted and aggressive uses by others.
Q: What mistakes must Europe avoid as it redesigns itself, including in major initiatives such as Mediterranean policies that affect not only Gaza but the broader African front?
A: First, there is a methodological problem. Europe, which has grown in prosperity and regulatory capacity, is dominated by an elitist and technocratic streak that struggles to relaunch the role of democracy.
- There is a strong need to return to politics—and to politics capable of making decisions.
- In recent years Europe has been more concerned with regulating the internal market and competition than with defending its prerogatives in the surrounding space, particularly to the east.
Q: Do you mean Asia — starting with Russia — and to the south, Africa?
A: Europe must understand that the era in which it focused more on currency and less on political borders must be completely rethought. It is no coincidence that the two greatest crises of recent years occurred on Europe’s borders: Ukraine and the Middle East.
- If Europe cannot stabilize and play a positive role around its borders, it will not hold in the future. Africa should not be addressed merely as a humanitarian gesture.
- It must be engaged because it is the main factor of demographic growth on Europe’s borders: within a few years it will have an increasingly large and young population, while Europe’s will be older and more dependent. This is a dynamic we will either manage or suffer—there is no alternative. That is why, in my view, the Mattei Plan is a positive initiative.
- But Europe must also be able to defend the investments it makes. If Europe has, in a sense, been pushed out of parts of Africa in recent years, it is because it has not defended its prerogatives. Russia and Turkey entered Libya because they had no hesitation in providing military support.
- Wagner arrived in Mali and facilitated Russia’s presence in the same way. Europe cannot act identically, given its democratic culture and laws, but neither can it remain passive.
- It must develop a military and strategic dimension toward this space and be ready to respond to legitimate requests for assistance. Europe must be perceived as a Western actor within NATO that defends Western values.
Q: What does Europe risk in concrete terms?
A: As a military historian of the transition between the medieval and early modern periods, I am reminded of Machiavelli’s reflections on the small Italian states such as Venice and Florence.
- They hosted intellectuals and technological innovation and possessed economic strength, yet lacked adequate state structures and armies.
- Meanwhile, larger national states—less economically advanced—were building powerful armies and state apparatuses and ultimately prevailed.
The bottom line: “I see a strong analogy with the present, despite obvious differences,” said Mr Manciulli.
- Europe risks becoming, mutatis mutandis, like those small prosperous states—overwhelmed by a world that knows how to use power and strategic capacity.
- We must not run this risk. Either Europe is capable of revitalizing NATO and the West by revitalizing itself and assuming responsibility, or it risks sinking into decline, as those Italian states once did.
