NATO

The hyperbolic idea of a mega suspension bridge record to unite the Italian peninsula with Sicily is something that the Romans already dreamed of. We are talking about an infrastructure that, if carried out, would become the largest suspension bridge on the planet. However, its chronicle as the driving force of rearmament in Europe is comparable to the project of underwater tunnel between Spain and North Africa. The old dream of the Strait. The ambition to link Sicily with the Italian peninsula by means of what would be the longest suspension bridge in the world reappeared at the center of the national debate not as a technical proposal, but as a head-on crash between political power and institutional control. Although the project It has been orbiting the imagination of different governments for decades, it was the combination of Matteo Salvini’s personal impulse and the political will of Giorgia Meloni’s executive that tried to reactivate it with an extraordinary sense of urgency. However, that speed caused the breakup: the Court of Accounts, constitutional guarantor of the control of public spending and compliance with national and European standards, rejected the file considering that the 2005 competition could not legally support a work that has tripled its estimated cost, that presents significant documentary gaps and that could violate essential rules of competition and environmental evaluation. Stand by. The decision made a few weeks ago, preventive and not definitiveexposed deep fissures in the management of the project, where political urgency prevailed over internal technical warnings from the Ministry of Transportation itself, which had requested more time to complete the documentation. The duel for two. The government’s reaction was immediate and furious. Meloni accused The judges were accused of overstepping their bounds and Salvini, who had turned the bridge into a symbol of his political survival, denounced a political gesture disguised as a technical judgment. They both had to moderate tone after recognizing that, although the Court of Auditors does not have the “final word”, its reservations are binding in the sense of raising the political responsibility of the executive: if the government decides to move forward without satisfying its objections, the Court will register the reservations and send them to Parliament, leaving an official record of the risks, including legal, budgetary and procedural ones. Continue without permissions. This warning is especially important given the possibility of future litigation promoted by groups opposed to the work. Still, the law allows the government go ahead even without the full endorsement of the institution, a path that Meloni and Salvini do not rule out, although aware that putting maximum pressure on the Court could open an institutional fracture that is difficult to manage and increase the likelihood that the courts will overthrow the project in later phases. The figures and the promises. The bridge 3.7 kilometers It is not just an infrastructure: it is a political symbol. Salvini presents it as a public work most important in the worldcapable of regenerating southern Italy, generating more than 36,000 jobs, stimulating economic growth of more than 23 billion euros and reducing crossing times across the Strait ten minutes away. But these arguments compete with other factors: its cost has escalated from the 3.8 billion expected in 2005. up to 13.5 billion current, and the Sicilian railway routes remain precarious. Furthermore, the local population asks before improvements in internal mobility that an iconic megaproject and the seismic risks of the Strait, one of the most active points in the Mediterranean, still lack a fully convincing technical response. For Salvini, however, abandoning the project would mean accepting a decline in his influence within the Italian right, especially at a time when Meloni dominates the political scene and his own bases are looking for evidence that he retains capacity. The technical fissures. The decision of the Court of Auditors was based on concrete elements: missing or poorly presented documentation, procedural shortcuts, inconsistencies between old figures and current projections, doubts about compliance with European procurement standards and an environmental file that, according to the judgesis based on claims of “imperative public interest” without the required technical support. The institution denounced that part of the essential documents They weren’t even pointed out. by the ministry, forcing the magistrates themselves to identify them. In parallel, the ministry’s technicians had warned Salvini months before that the precipitation could lead to exactly this scenario. The minister decided move forward anywayaware that delaying the process would have meant admitting that the work schedule set for the end of the year was impossible to meet. That political obstinacy is now turning against him, in the form of doubts about his ability to manage such a monumental project. The labyrinth of the contest. The most explosive element for the immediate future of the bridge is the question of the tender. Salvini opted to reactivate the contract awarded in 2005 to Eurolink consortiumled by Webuild and accompanied by companies from Spain and Japan, precisely to avoid a new contest. In 2012, when the project was paralyzed, the consortium demanded 700 million euros in compensation, which it will only withdraw if works resume. But the judges have pointed out that financial changes and uncertainty about the updated cost could force a new tender, which would delay the work for years, perhaps more than a decade. Environmental objections. The government tried to shield the project with a document that proclaimed reasons of public interest imperative to overcome environmental obstacles, but the Court of Accounts he replied that these justifications lack solid technical support and do not adequately detail the impact on extremely sensitive coastal and marine areas. Thus we arrive at the executive’s attempt to present the bridge as an infrastructure of strategic value. for NATO (arguing that it would facilitate rapid movement of troops in the central Mediterranean), an idea that was welcomed with skepticism and even irony: for regional experts, the bridge would be “at most a military objective,” not an operational tool. The use of international security as an … Read more