The Da Monti Code

As EU-friendly technocrats take over the Italian government, wild conspiracy theories are running rampant.

BY JAMES WALSTON | DECEMBER 1, 2011

Conspiracy theories are alive and well in post-Berlusconi Italy.

A Nov. 30 editorial by Marco Travaglio in the daily newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano, headlined "Giù il cappuccio" ("Off with the hood"), makes the point that the new junior ministers in Prime Minister Mario Monti's government have political pedigrees (and sometimes not very clean ones) behind their much-touted "technical" qualifications. This is all fair enough.  But it is a little strange when he goes on to infer that many of them are masons wearing hoods. Freemasons have always been the Church's bogeymen, but even in secular Italy they carry a whiff of sulphur and there have long been murky reports of maverick lodges that live outside the law.

Travaglio is an investigative journalist who for a decade or more has been the country's conscience on corruption and malpractice, mostly focusing on former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. So why is he now trafficking in conspiracy theories -- and about Monti, who many people see as a competent technocratic savior (not to mention the anti-Berlusconi) for Italy?

From the moment Monti was given the job of forming a government in mid-November, there have been a swirl of insinuations first around him, then around his cabinet, and now, around his junior ministers, too.

Monti's background and demeanor make him an ideal target for conspiracy theories. He is apparently a man of power but always understated, quiet and confident with a subtle sense of humour. This in a country where power is usually advertised loudly. This was certainly true in Berlusconi's case; but long before that, ministers and cardinals in Rome generally had costumes and cars that ostentatiously showed their status. Monti in contrast, chose an older car from the prime minister's fleet and is, personally, very low key. In the past, the only downplayed power in Italy was the mafia, the ultimate conspiracy.

Monti's power too, is hidden, so the conspiracy logic goes. He comes from Italy's most elite university, the Bocconi in Milan, where he has been a student, teacher, rector, and president. He also went to Yale. A good proportion of his cabinet are also Bocconiani, enhancing the idea of an old boy network. Monti is also a real Catholic as are a significant number of his cabinet. (Almost all Italians are nominally Catholic but few practice beyond rites of passage -- hatching, matching, and dispatching.)

Then there is the banking connection. Monti worked as an international advisor to Goldman Sachs and -- even more sinister for the conspiracy theorists -- he has been an active member of the Bilderberg group and the Trilateral Commission. Both are very discreet groups for people of influence, where international politics and economics are discussed off the record. They are also favorite targets for conspiracy theorists throughout the world, who brand them as cabals of devious white men planning world dominance.

His time in Brussels is well known and well documented, as is the mutual respect between him and the EU establishment. But for some, that too is evidence of underhanded activity.

A few days after Monti's appointment, a very loquacious and publicity-seeking Freemason, Giole Magaldi, declared that Monti was a mason on the controversial radio chat show La Zanzara. He went on to claim that an unspecified number of his cabinet were also masons.

JOHN THYS/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS:
 

James Walston is a professor of international relations at the American University of Rome. A version of this piece was originally published on his blog.

SANDRABRANDON

10:52 PM ET

December 1, 2011

people just love conspiracy theories ...

I wonder if these conspiracy theories have something to do with the occupy movement going on right now all over the world? Especially since this is based around the banking industry now. Lets see how this story develops ... ;)

 

EXULT49

9:54 AM ET

December 2, 2011

Travaglio's point

I'm sincerely surprised by these statements. There are quite strange for an investigative journalist who usually shows an open mind approach and an attentive knowledge of facts. Considering Monti's catholic faith difficult to think he could be a mason. But as anyone knows a real catholic can be much worse than them. We'll see pretty soon what kind of politics Mr. Monti will propose and adopt . Anyhow I'd like to underline that we surely moved forward a better context considering the Berlusconi's idiocy.

 

ANGLINAMARTINROBERT

10:15 AM ET

December 2, 2011

The important thing with

The important thing with regard to Pakistan is not to deceive ourselves. Americans are prone to think of "ally" and "friend" as synonyms, but an ally can share some of our interests without sharing our values.

That Pakistan is a problem is beyond question. But it makes little sense to treat a large country on which we depend for supply routes to the American army in Afghanistan as an enemy, and we cannot ignore it either. Moreover, while it appears to be true that the Pakistani security services are riddled with terrorist sympathizers and the country's nuclear establishment represents a very large security risk, it is also true that many Pakistanis in both have cooperated effectively and in good faith with American and international efforts to fight terrorism.

With that said, we certainly ought to be looking for ways to decrease our dependence on Pakistan. One of the more obvious ones involves the size and duration of America's military commitment in Afghanistan. Beyond that, though, I think there would be great value in having American officials speak more frankly in public about touchy subjects related to Pakistan.

A lot of Americans believe Osama bin Laden had enablers in the Pakistani security services. Terror groups once sponsored by the ISI have launched attacks that have killed many hundreds of Pakistanis. The preoccupation of the Pakistani security services with India serves their institutional interests at the expense of their country's (as well as ours). At present, we have a climate of profound mistrust between Washington and Islamabad, in which American officials say many things in private they do not dare say in public. We have tried to address mistrust by gestures of goodwill and efforts to soothe wounded pride -- a traditional diplomatic approach, but one that has gotten its fair trial and hasn't been working.

It's not a question, really, of whether Pakistan is a friend or an enemy. It's more a matter of how we manage this problem that is dangerous now and could become much more so.

 

ANGLINAMARTINROBERT

10:16 AM ET

December 2, 2011

The current attitude of the

The current attitude of the US administration towards Pakistan is anti-common sense and definitely not in the long-term interests of the US. Pakistan has left no one in doubt that if ever there was an ally that was not an ally it is Pakistan in relation to the US and its Allies in Afghanistan.
Pakistan does not want US-led effort in Afghanistan to succeed. We know very well that Gen Musharraf in September 2001 had no choice but to fall in line when Mr Bush thundered at Pakistan in the wake of 9/11. It was clear to Gen Musharraf that he and Pakistan could survive the displeasure of the Taliban, then still ruling in Afghanistan, but he and Pakistan could not have withstood the active hostility of the US, which was soon joined by NATO in “the coalition of the willing”. But Gen Musharraf made up for Pakistan’s predicament by playing on both sides of the line. He made a great show of cooperation with the US-led Allies and reaped immense benefits for Pakistan and the Pakistan Army, but in actual terms he or Pakistan did precious little to advance US and Allied objectives.
Even in the so-called peace talks between the US and the Afghan Taliban, said to be under way currently, Pakistan goes on pushing for having the Afghan Taliban made a part of the ruling dispensation in Afghanistan, because Pakistan believes that it can still command the Afghan Taliban for Pakistan’s interests, which are not on all fours with the Afghan interests. As it is, we read of the current tension between Pakistan and Afghanistan, which seems to show that relations between the two governments are far from cordial. But Mr Karzai was not Pakistan’s choice.
Decision makers in Washington should see that Pakistan is not an ally of the US in anything. If any matter of significance arises, the Pakistan prime minister rushes to Beijing, not to Washington. Anyone with even the meanest intelligence should see that some at any rate of Pakistan’s decisions are made in Beijing, where, let it be said, there is little sympathy for the US and its entanglement in Afghanistan.
The US under Mr Obama’s leadership seems resolved to start leaving Afghanistan later this summer, regardless of progress or lack of progress on ground in the matter of the ability of the Afghanistan government to take over police and security duties from the Isaf. I have a lurking suspicion that Pakistan nourishes an ambition to turn US departure from Afghanistan into an ignominious rout, not far different from the Former Soviet Union’s departure at the end of 1989.
V. C. Bhutani, Delhi, India, July 9 2011, 0930 IST

 

STEVELBSTN

11:36 AM ET

December 2, 2011

Pakistan

Would certainly not trust Pakistan after Bin Laden was allowed to live there for so long.

Steve

 

YARINSIZ

4:22 PM ET

December 24, 2011

With that said, we certainly

With that said, we certainly ought to be looking for ways to decrease our dependence on Pakistan. One of the more obvious ones involves the size and duration of America's military commitment in Afghanistan. Beyond that, though, I think there would be seslichat great value in having American officials speak more frankly in public about touchy subjects related to Pakistan.

 

KURUKIN71

12:55 PM ET

December 29, 2011

The Trilateral Commission

Even just in the so-called peace talks between your US and also the Afghan Taliban, considered arrived currently, Pakistan continues pushing to have the Afghan Taliban designed a area of the ruling dispensation in Afghanistan, because Pakistan believes that it may still command the Afghan Taliban for Pakistan’s interests, which aren't using the Afghan interests. Because it is, we read from the current tension between Pakistan and Afghanistan, which appears to reveal that relations between your two governments are not even close to cordial. But Mr Rusty Moore wasn't Pakistan’s choice.