INTERVIEW WITH PHILOSOPHER AND POLITICIAN MICHELE NICOLETTI ON THE RELEVANCE OF THE CAMPANA DEI CADUTI

At the heart of the tensions that are once again shaking the world, Michele Nicoletti, university professor and former president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, reflects on the universal value of the Bell of the Fallen, symbol of Peace, memory and responsibility. As a philosopher and politician, for years he has investigated the connection between evil, ethics and democratic coexistence, observing how violence always re-emerges in old and new forms. In our interview with him, we analysed the role of dialogue between cultures, the weight of religions in conflicts and reconciliations, and the need for a policy capable of building a shared will. For Nicoletti, the Bell is not a static monument, but an invitation to recognise human dignity as the foundation of any just order. We therefore asked him how, in his career as a philosopher and lecturer, he has often worked on the relationship between politics, evil and ethical responsibility.

"The presence of evil in history is an ineradicable mystery. We are now tragically seeing it at work again, in wars and massacres. After years in which, especially in our country, we had been lulled by the hope of definitive Peace, the war has returned. In the ancient forms of military invasions of other people's territories, but also in the very modern forms of technological wars, which are no less devastating. We hoped that all this evil could be at least partly tempered and contained by international law, and significant steps forward were taken in this direction after the Second World War. But today we face a devastating step backward: not only battles between soldiers, but the mass killing of civilians, the deportation of children, the rape of women, and even the use of starvation as a weapon. The message conveyed by the Bell seems more relevant today than ever before'.

Maria Dolens was created as a reminder of the horrors of war and an appeal for dialogue between peoples. How does this perspective resonate with your research experience in universities and your international work?

We must not grow weary of dialogue or of creating opportunities for dialogue among peoples. We must not assume that peace rests solely on the balance of arsenals or on economic exchanges that often conceal forms of exploitation. It is essential to nurture the cultural dialogue, especially among the younger generations. The meetings that the Bell promotes between teachers and schools from different countries - where girls and boys from diverse cultures can discuss and work toward shared positions on their future and the future of humanity - are exciting and essential.

You have been exploring the relationship between religion and politics for a long time now. How useful is this relationship in interpreting the symbolism of the Bell, which speaks to believers and non-believers alike in a language that is first ethical and only then religious?

Religions are places where the ultimate meanings of existence often settle, the important things in life, for individuals and communities. We seek refuge in them when the suffering of life becomes unbearable, the pain inexplicable, the injustice intolerable. We turn to them in search of inspiration, when life becomes flat and we feel the need to transcend the suffocating horizon of the present and invoke a different time. With this potential, religions can play very different roles in human societies. Sometimes they radicalise conflicts by exaggerating 'their' response to life's problems and condemning others. Sometimes they are capable of extraordinary conflict mitigation, multiplying feelings of benevolence, love and solidarity among all human beings. They are often sources of creativity. The symbolism of the Bell is one of the strongest. It was forged from the bronze of weapons to proclaim Peace, recalling the words of the prophet "They shall forge their swords into ploughshares, their spears into sickles; one people shall not lift up the sword against another people, they shall no longer practise the art of war" (Isaiah 2:3-4). And it is a symbol of everyday life, of the passing of time, of death but also of resurrection. A reminder that the meaning of time’s passage on earth is this: to transform death into life, despair into hope.

Your work at the Council of Europe has brought you face to face with conflicts, tensions and democratic fragilities. How can a symbol like the Bell help foster a more conscious and engaged European political culture?

The symbol of the Bell does not stand alone on the hill. It is immersed in the middle of other symbols. The flags of the many countries that have welcomed its message and wanted to stand alongside it. Peace does not happen by itself; it needs people who are willing to serve it. When I was president of the Italian Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, there was no Ukrainian flag at the Bell and I immediately asked the Ukrainian ambassador to Italy to come to Rovereto and hoist his country's flag there, especially as the Ukrainian community in Trentino was already very much alive. It was a deeply meaningful ceremony that allowed us to express our solidarity with a country already suffering due to Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea. The presence of the flags reminds us not only that all countries must be actors for Peace, but must also respect the lives of other countries. Peace cannot exist without justice, without recognising the existence of others, their rights, and their dignity. Peace is not merely the absence of conflict; it is, in the words of Augustine, “the tranquillity of order,”that is, giving each their due and rejecting violence. This is what Europe should do.

You have combined political practice with theoretical reflection. What can symbolic places like the Bell of the Fallen offer to the often polarised contemporary public debate?

The Bell is a place for reflection and dialogue. In today’s public sphere, reflection and dialogue are as essential as daily bread. Our collective endeavour - regardless of our role in education or politics - should be to multiply places of reflection and dialogue. We are well aware that the public sphere today is characterised by the opposite dynamics, i.e. saying the first thing that crosses one's mind and clashing with others, but there is no point in simply condemning these habits. We must create alternatives: not get tired of 'reasoning' about politics and trying to understand the motives of others. This does not mean abandoning our own ideas; the task of democratic politics is not to impose “my” will over “your” will, but to work toward building “our” will.

At a time when conflicts are once again at the forefront, which philosophical categories do you consider most useful for interpreting the original message of the Bell?

The fundamental principle must remain the infinite dignity of every human being. This is the cornerstone on which our democratic coexistence is built, as stated in our Constitution, and international and European coexistence, as stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, whose 75th anniversary we celebrated this year - also at the Bell. The Bell was invented in protest against the carnage of World War I when the nation states of Europe, the home of humanism and human dignity, allowed millions of young people to be slaughtered in order to assert nationalistic ideals. Then, not content with this, a few years later they escalated their inhuman policies, plunging us into totalitarianism, the Shoah, and the Second World War. Respecting human rights does not mean respecting ideas, but respecting real, flesh and blood people, each one of whom has infinite dignity and deserves a full and free life.

Michele Nicoletti