If on the one hand the "mighty" West wanted to impose direct economic sanctions, at least in intent, to punish the Russian giant, on the other hand, and paradoxically, the sanctioner would seem to have ended up funding the coffers of the alleged sanctioned "rewarding him "(So it would seem) in fact. If we then consider the circumstance reconnected to the difficulty of reconverting energy flows and ensuring the supply of raw materials, then the picture appears in all its completeness to offer to the outside the image of a Europe harnessed which, in the illusion to save Ukraine in order to save itself, it could continue to supply Ukraine itself, or rather what remains of it, the armaments deemed necessary and, at the same time, to feed the Russian coffers.

"Sanctions against" it would be appropriate to observe: but against whom precisely? Without prejudice to the severe sentence for the aggressor, the answer is as always directly consequent and, unfortunately, all too clear with respect to its consequences which, on closer consideration, would seem to end up discontenting a population already overly tried as a result of the two-year pandemic. .

A question above all arises beyond and beyond any small (if you want to consider it as such) practical reflection. How can a sanction aimed at hitting a third State with respect to the Union maintain its "vis offensiva" if it has, after all, a unilateral character and does not seem to have even been decided by the United Nations Security Council within which, precisely Does Russia have full veto rights?

How did we come to believe that an entirely voluntary provision, such as "sanctions", and not at all imperative in the restricted terms of its application, could economically annihilate the Russian power which, in response, would seem to have seen its commercial traffic intensify with the rest of the world? At what high price must we pay for sharing the so-called “Atlantic” orientation in the discipline of Russia-Ukraine relations? The current economic sanctions have proved to be useful or at least sufficient to impose a decisive "stop" to a war that probably none of us has fully understood in terms of the triggering reasons?

To consider everything, we found ourselves having to reckon without the host, and pretending to evaluate today the potential effectiveness of sanctions that it would have been right to consider in their ex ante effects with respect to their application. Therefore, the circumstance can only be a source of profound embarrassment especially for those who previously had, and will then, after next September 25, the direct responsibilities of the government of the country. It almost seems that we have come to the point: either us or Ukraine. In the end, he seems to have gone to great lengths to arrive at an out-out. In short, and to put it differently, reality seems to have overcome the imagination: economic sanctions seem to have reverberated their "firepower" on the whole of the sanctioning countries, revealing themselves to be in no way effective on the alleged sanctioned not only ex ante, ie on the emotional, but also and above all ex post in terms of the economic reflection in and of itself considered. It seems to have been absent from the start, on the part of the disposing states, any preventive evaluation of the potential and effectiveness of the "effects" (excuse the pun) that those anti-Russia measures would have generated.

Meanwhile, because, with profound naivety probably fueled by the belief of their own superiority, the various sanctioning countries, all in all limited in terms of numbers, have proved unable to consider the potential interconnections of Russia with the rest of the world.

Therefore, precisely the circumstance that those same measures were not shared by almost the generality of the world population, seems to have allowed the alleged sanctioned person to be able to circumvent the sanctions and to do, so to speak, "otherwise".

Finally, because, on closer consideration, not only does the West seem to have blatantly failed in its attempt to carry out a policy of isolation to the detriment of Russia, but rather to have achieved the opposite effect of "orienting it elsewhere" by expanding its economic potential towards countries other. We find ourselves having to face, helpless and tired, a period of unstoppable relegation, with skyrocketing unemployment, and a level of financial deprivation that risks imploding the very regulatory mechanisms of the principle of sovereignty, both national and European.

If we go to "draw conclusions", in essence, we must resign ourselves to accepting a double order of conclusions: the one for which the sanctions have not proved useful in curbing the conflict which, on the contrary, would rather seem to have intensified precisely on the level military; the other for which, indisputably, the sanctions could have reverberated the hoped-for effects only when there was, on a global level, the unanimous sharing of the same by the widest audience of international partners. This was not the case, and the consequences seem to be clear to everyone, “competent” and not. Saying it otherwise: if the fact that the sanctions imposed by the European Union appear to respect the obligations deriving from international law may be true, it would seem to be equally true that those "decisions", such as legal acts of general application, are binding only for Member States subject to European jurisdiction. So who benefits from all this? Surely the time has come to take decisive decisions for the future of Italy and Europe, and the next executive will inevitably be called upon to offer satisfactory answers first of all to Italian citizens given the government responsibilities that it will inevitably cover. The time has come for concreteness and truth. Whoever assumes the responsibilities of the country's government will be called upon to make "system" choices that could irreversibly condition the future of the population and the relations of power with the member countries first of all, and then with third countries. It is forbidden to make mistakes.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer - Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata