Italy is more rigid towards migration, also because of Europe's responsibility

That the question of immigration had been central to the Italian election campaign was well known: even for the previous government, which had a completely different direction towards refugees, it had repeatedly stressed how Italy was left alone, from Europe in the management of the migratory emergency. The aid was only of an economic nature and also insufficient, then Brussels did not go beyond the declarations of principle. On the issue of the fight against immigration, the Lega Nord, now the governing party, has built its own electoral success, with a good responsibility from the central European institutions, which have not been able to think of a policy of management of landings and of the division of refugees , lurking behind the justification, now insufficient of the Dublin Treaty. If in Brussels, but also in Berlin and Paris, they thought that even this government, after so many threats, continued the policy of welcoming the previous one, they elaborated a completely wrong assessment or, worse, they did not even try a different approach to a problem that affects the whole continent. The new Italian government must pay the bill to the electorate who voted for it and show that it maintains a rigid attitude with Europe and, at the same time, preserve the Italian country from the dangers that come with migration. Thus the case of the refused naves becomes the example that must serve everyone and must oblige Brussels to become aware of the Italian hostility inmodoreale. Even Malta's target is functional to this intent, but the Maltese closure attitude begins to present little justification: with the excuse of its limited size in Valletta they have always refused to cooperate with Italy, without Europe reproaching this behavior. If the behavior of the Italian government is morally reprehensible it is not less that of France, which closes its borders or that of Germany, which continues to be very strict with the countries of Eastern Europe, whose presence in Europe constitutes economic benefits in Berlin. Despite the fact that European countries had been warned in the just past Canadian summit of the seven most industrialized countries, we did not want to believe in the blockade of Italian ports. One reason for this immobility can be the conviction that in the Italian government, formed by two political forces of different origins, there could be differences of vision that could exceed the intentions of the Northern League. The point is that this party, notwithstanding a lower percentage of votes collected, seems to have assumed the command of the government, probably because of the greater political experience of its members. The other party, the Five Star Movement seems to be being driven into an executive that expresses values ​​of the right, in line with its proximity to the French National Front. The fact remains that if Europe were to make changes to the Dublin regulation, create the conditions for a fair division of migrants and contribute to prevention on the African territory of departures, would remove all excuse and reason to the government of Rome not to accommodate refugees . The future scenario could be a series of ships that roam the Mediterranean in search of a landing place? Italy can not be forced to open its ports without the will of its government and in doing so the moral rejection after Rome can only fall on all European capitals, so all of Europe will have to share the shame of the lack of acceptance, even those governments that have kept a politically correct line denied by the facts. Of course, if just a government put together in a cornered way, as is the Italian, to unmask the hypocrisy of Brussels, the need to rebuild Europe is even more compelling than it seemed.